High Court Dismisses Management’s Appeal in Shikshan Sevak Appointment Dispute, Upholds Direction for Reconsideration of Approval Due to Invalid Rejection Reason and Management’s Own Wrong in Selection Process

Appeal against the order of the single judge allowing a writ petition and directing the Education Officer to reconsider approval for appointments of Shikshan Sevaks

The appellant management sought reversal of the single judge’s order and restoration of the rejection of approval and termination of the respondents’ services

The Education Officer rejected approval of the Shikshan Sevaks’ appointments on the ground that the Secretary of the management was not invited to the School Committee meetings; the employees were prevented from signing the muster roll and approached the Grievance Committee which directed a fresh selection process; the employees challenged that decision before the High Court

Single Judge allowed the writ petition, holding that the reason for rejection was unjustified, the selection process was regular, and directed the Education Officer to reconsider the approval; no prior decision by Grievance Committee other than direction for fresh selection

Whether the rejection of approval to Shikshan Sevaks’ appointments based on absence of the Secretary from the Selection Committee meetings was justified Whether the management could terminate the services of the Shikshan Sevaks for a defect in the selection process attributable to the management’s own conduct

Appellant contended that the employees had not worked for a period of two years and therefore the rejection and termination were justified Appellant argued that the rejection of approval was justified due to a defect in the constitution of the Selection Committee Respondents sought to uphold the single judge’s findings and direction

Where the defect in the selection process of an employee is attributable to the management's own conduct, the management cannot rely on that defect to terminate the employee's services; the management may at best revoke the appointment order. Termination is justified only in cases of misrepresentation or misconduct by the employee. The management cannot take advantage of its own wrong.

The learned Single Judge found that the reason given for refusal of approval i.e. one Rambhau Mahajan, Secretary of the appellant/Management, was not invited to the meetings of the School Committee is not justified and according to the learned Single Judge, the Grievance Committee ought not have accepted this reason for upholding approval. if the management finds that there is a defect in the appointment of an employee by reason of some defect in the procedure of constitution of Committee which is not attributable to the employee, it is open for them to revoke the appointment order and not to resort to termination of services of such an employee. Termination of services may be resorted to where there is any misrepresentation by the employee in the matter of selection or in his conduct. it is often found that the managements issue appointment orders to employees/teachers or Shikshan Sewaks and then seek to justify the termination of services of such employees on the ground that there was defect in the process of appointments and in a sense, seek to take advantage of their own wrong.

The respondents were employed as Shikshan Sewaks. Approval of their appointments was rejected. They were prevented from signing the muster roll. They approached the Grievance Committee, which directed the management to undertake a fresh selection process. The respondents filed Writ Petition No.1159 of 2007 before the High Court. The single judge allowed the writ petition on 5.2.2010, holding that the rejection reason was unjustified and directing the Education Officer to reconsider approval. The management filed the present Letters Patent Appeal challenging that order.