Case Note & Summary
The judgment involves two writ petitions: one filed by Shatrughan Dada Kamble (the employee) challenging his termination, and another filed by the Academy of Fine Arts & Crafts Trust (the employer) challenging the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with back wages. The employee was appointed as a Sweeper in the Trust's school without prior approval of the Education Officer, which was required under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (M.E.P.S. Act) and the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations, 1966. The Trust terminated his services after about two years. The employee raised an industrial dispute, and the Labour Court ordered reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages. The High Court held that the appointment was illegal and void ab initio because it was made without the mandatory prior approval. Consequently, the employee was not entitled to the protection of Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act, which requires prior approval for termination. The Labour Court's award was set aside, and the employee's petition was dismissed. The court emphasized that an appointment made in violation of statutory regulations cannot be regularized, and the principle of 'no work no pay' applies.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Illegal Appointment - Void ab initio - Appointment of a Sweeper without prior approval of the Education Officer under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher Secondary Education Boards Regulations, 1966 is illegal and void ab initio. The Labour Court erred in ordering reinstatement as the appointment itself was contrary to statutory provisions. (Paras 6-10) B) Service Law - Termination - Illegally Appointed Employee - Section 5 of M.E.P.S. Act, 1977 - An employee whose appointment is void ab initio is not entitled to the protection of Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act, 1977, which requires prior approval for termination. The termination of such an employee does not require compliance with the said section. (Paras 11-13) C) Labour Law - Reinstatement - Illegality - The Labour Court cannot grant reinstatement with back wages for an appointment made in violation of statutory regulations. The principle of 'no work no pay' applies, and the employee is not entitled to any wages for the period he did not work. (Paras 14-16) D) Writ Jurisdiction - Interference with Findings of Fact - Perversity - The High Court can interfere with findings of fact recorded by the Labour Court if they are based on no evidence or are perverse. In the present case, the finding that the appointment was valid was perverse and liable to be set aside. (Paras 17-19)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appointment of the petitioner as a Sweeper by the Trust was legal and valid, and whether the Labour Court was justified in ordering reinstatement with continuity of service and back wages.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the employee's writ petition (WP 7387/2013) and allowed the trust's writ petition (WP 1849/2013), setting aside the Labour Court's award of reinstatement with back wages. The court held that the appointment was illegal and void ab initio, and the employee was not entitled to any relief.
Law Points
- Appointment without prior approval of the Education Officer is void ab initio
- Termination of an illegally appointed employee does not require compliance with Section 5 of the M.E.P.S. Act
- 1977
- Labour Court cannot grant reinstatement for an appointment made in violation of statutory regulations
- Writ Court can interfere with findings of fact if based on no evidence or perverse
- The principle of 'no work no pay' applies to illegal appointments
