Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sundarlal Hari Rokade, was appointed as Head Master of a school run by Dnyan Prasarak Shikshan Sanstha on probation for two years with effect from 1.9.1995. However, he was orally terminated from service w.e.f. 24.6.1996 without any inquiry or notice. He filed an appeal before the School Tribunal challenging the termination. The management in its response claimed that the petitioner had voluntarily resigned on 1.7.1996. The Tribunal rejected the management's plea of voluntary resignation, but dismissed the appeal on its own motion on the ground that the petitioner did not possess five years teaching experience as required under Rule 3(1)(b) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules (MEPS Rules). The petitioner challenged this order by way of a writ petition before the Bombay High Court. The High Court noted that the management had not raised the issue of ineligibility in its response before the Tribunal and had not challenged the Tribunal's finding rejecting the resignation plea. The Court held that the management cannot be permitted to raise a new ground for the first time in the writ petition. The termination was illegal as it was not based on any valid ground such as unsatisfactory service. The Court allowed the writ petition, set aside the Tribunal's order, and directed the management to reinstate the petitioner as Head Master with continuity of service and full back wages.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Probationary Employee - Illegal Termination - The petitioner was appointed as Head Master on probation for two years under Section 5(1) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (MEPS Act). The management orally terminated his services w.e.f. 24.6.1996 without any inquiry or assigning any reason. The School Tribunal found that the management's plea of voluntary resignation was false, but dismissed the appeal on the ground that the petitioner lacked five years teaching experience under Rule 3(1)(b) of the MEPS Rules. Held that the termination was illegal as it was not based on unsatisfactory service or any other valid ground, and the management could not raise a new ground of ineligibility not pleaded before the Tribunal (Paras 1-6). B) Service Law - Eligibility for Appointment - New Ground Not Pleaded - The management in its response to the appeal only contended that the petitioner had voluntarily resigned. It did not raise the issue of the petitioner's lack of five years teaching experience. The School Tribunal suo motu dismissed the appeal on that ground. Held that the management cannot be permitted to raise a new ground of ineligibility for the first time in the writ petition, as it was not pleaded before the Tribunal and the petitioner had no opportunity to meet it (Paras 5-6). C) Service Law - Reinstatement and Back Wages - Consequential Relief - Since the termination was illegal and the management failed to justify it, the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement with continuity of service and full back wages. The Court directed the management to reinstate the petitioner as Head Master with all consequential benefits (Para 6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the School Tribunal could dismiss the appeal on the ground of the petitioner's ineligibility under Rule 3(1)(b) of the MEPS Rules when the management had not raised that ground in its response to the memo of appeal.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 7.8.2007 passed by the School Tribunal in Appeal No.STC-287/1996 is quashed and set aside. The respondent-management is directed to reinstate the petitioner as Head Master with continuity of service and full back wages.
Law Points
- Termination of probationary employee without inquiry is illegal
- Management cannot raise new ground of ineligibility not pleaded before Tribunal
- Rule 3(1)(b) of MEPS Rules requires five years teaching experience for Head Master
- Section 5(1) of MEPS Act provides for probation appointment
