Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, an Assistant Teacher, was initially appointed on 15/6/1990 at Shivdas Vidyalaya and worked there until 3/11/1977 when he was found surplus. His services were shifted to Subhash Vidyalaya where he worked from 25/4/1977 to 31/8/1985, and again found surplus. Thereafter, his services were shifted to Vasantrao Naik Vidyalaya run by respondent nos. 1 and 2. He was working on a clear and vacant post until he was allegedly terminated from service. The management served him with an order dated 1/4/1988 relieving him from service and referring him to the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nanded. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Services) Regulation Act, 1977 (M.E.P.S. Act) before the School Tribunal, which partly allowed the appeal to the extent of retrenchment compensation but dismissed the claim for reinstatement. The High Court held that the termination without prior approval of the Education Officer under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act is illegal and void ab initio. The court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's judgment, and directed the management to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and full back wages from the date of termination till reinstatement.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Retrenchment - Prior Approval - Section 5 of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Services) Regulation Act, 1977 - The management terminated the petitioner's services without obtaining prior approval from the Education Officer as required under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act. The court held that such termination is illegal and void ab initio, and the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. (Paras 1-10)
B) Service Law - Retrenchment Compensation - Section 9 of M.E.P.S. Act - The School Tribunal had partly allowed the appeal to the extent of retrenchment compensation but dismissed the claim for reinstatement. The High Court held that the Tribunal erred in not ordering reinstatement, as the termination without prior approval is a nullity. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the termination of the petitioner's services by the management without prior approval of the Education Officer under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act is legal and valid.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the judgment of the School Tribunal dated 4/5/1991, and directed the management to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and full back wages from the date of termination till reinstatement.
Law Points
- Retrenchment without prior approval of Education Officer is illegal
- Section 5 of M.E.P.S. Act requires prior approval for termination
- Section 9 of M.E.P.S. Act provides appeal remedy
- Retrenchment compensation must be paid
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (02) 14
Writ Petition No. 2073 of 1991
Mr. P.K. Joshi for petitioner, Mr. N.H. Borade, A.G.P. for State, Mr. S.S. Choudhari for respondent nos. 1 & 2
Dattaraya Jairam Rathod, President, Baliram Patil (Rathod) Shikshan Prasaraak Mandal, Wanola; Yadav Harji Jadhav, Incharge Head Master, Vasantrao Naik Vidyalaya; The Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nanded; The Dy. Director of Education, Aurangabad; The Presiding Officer, Schools Tribunal, Aurangabad
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the judgment of the School Tribunal which partly allowed the petitioner's appeal under Section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act but denied reinstatement.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought quashing of the Tribunal's judgment and reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages.
Filing Reason
The petitioner was terminated from service by the management without prior approval of the Education Officer, which he contended was illegal under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act.
Previous Decisions
The School Tribunal partly allowed the appeal to the extent of retrenchment compensation but dismissed the claim for reinstatement.
Issues
Whether the termination of the petitioner's services by the management without prior approval of the Education Officer under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act is legal and valid.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioner argued that his termination was illegal as it was done without prior approval of the Education Officer as required under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act.
The respondents contended that the petitioner was not pulling on well with the management and that the termination was justified.
Ratio Decidendi
Termination of an employee of a private school without prior approval of the Education Officer under Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act is illegal and void ab initio, and the employee is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages.
Judgment Excerpts
By this petition, the petitioner impugns Judgment dated 4/5/1991 rendered by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad in Appeal No. 44 of 1988, whereby his Appeal filed under section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Services) Regulation Act, 1977 was substantially dismissed though it was partly allowed to the extent of retrenchment compensation.
It is not in dispute that the petitioner was served with memorandums by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 and he was not pulling on well with the management of the educational Institution.
It is also undisputed that he was served with an order dated 1/4/1988 to the effect that he was being relieved from the service and was referred to the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nanded.
Procedural History
The petitioner was initially appointed on 15/6/1990 as Assistant Teacher at Shivdas Vidyalaya, worked till 3/11/1977, found surplus, shifted to Subhash Vidyalaya on 25/4/1977, worked till 31/8/1985, again found surplus, shifted to Vasantrao Naik Vidyalaya. On 1/4/1988, he was terminated. He filed Appeal No. 44 of 1988 before the School Tribunal, which partly allowed the appeal on 4/5/1991. He then filed the present writ petition in the High Court.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Services) Regulation Act, 1977: Section 5, Section 9
