Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Diocesan Society of Education, St. Xavier's College, and its Principal Fr. Antimo Gomes, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the action of the State of Goa and Goa University in withholding consent for the re-employment of the Principal after his superannuation. The Principal was appointed on 20.06.1991 and was to retire at age 60 on 05.03.2000. The petitioners sought re-employment for two more years from June 2000. The University initially granted consent by letter dated 03.09.2001, but later withdrew it. The State Government also withheld consent by letter dated 03.05.2000. The petitioners argued that the re-employment was governed by Statute SA 19(xx) of Goa University, which allowed re-employment with consent of the University and Government. The respondents contended that the consent was withdrawn due to certain irregularities and that the petitioners had no right to re-employment. The Court analyzed the correspondence and found that the University had initially granted consent, and the State's withholding of consent was arbitrary and without valid reasons. The Court held that the power to withhold consent must be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily, and that the petitioners had a legitimate expectation of re-employment. The Court allowed the petition, directing the respondents to pay the salary of the Principal for the period from 01.07.2001 to 31.05.2002 and to treat the re-employment as valid.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Re-employment of Superannuated Teachers - Statute SA 19(xx) of Goa University - Consent - The issue was whether the State and University could withhold consent for re-employment of a Principal after superannuation. The Court held that the power to withhold consent must be exercised reasonably and not arbitrarily, and that the petitioners had a legitimate expectation of re-employment based on the University's earlier consent. (Paras 1-10) B) Constitutional Law - Writ Jurisdiction - Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India - Maintainability - The Court held that the petition was maintainable as the action of the respondents was arbitrary and violative of principles of natural justice. (Paras 1-10) C) Education Law - Minority Institution - Right to Administer - The petitioners, being a minority institution, had the right to appoint and re-employ teachers subject to University statutes. The Court held that the respondents' action interfered with this right without justification. (Paras 1-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the State Government and University could withhold consent for re-employment of a superannuated Principal arbitrarily and without valid reasons under Statute SA 19(xx) of Goa University.
Final Decision
The Court allowed the writ petition, directing the respondents to pay the salary of the Principal for the period from 01.07.2001 to 31.05.2002 and to treat the re-employment as valid.
Law Points
- Re-employment of superannuated teachers is governed by Statute SA 19(xx)
- consent cannot be withheld arbitrarily
- principles of natural justice apply
- writ petition maintainable under Articles 226 and 227
