Bombay High Court Allows Teacher's Petition Against Termination and Appointment of Substitute. Management's failure to complete probation period and termination without inquiry violates Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD In Favour of Accused
  • 48
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Vijaya d/o Vithalrao Ingle, was appointed as an Assistant Teacher by the respondent Management on 01/08/1991 on probation for one academic year. Subsequent appointment orders were issued on 15/06/1992 and 10/06/1993, with the latter again specifying probation for one academic year. The petitioner alleged that she was made to sign blank papers at the time of joining, which she feared would be used to show her resignation. By an application dated 25/04/1994, she apprised the Education Officer of this apprehension. The Management terminated her services and appointed respondent No.4 in her place. The petitioner challenged the termination and the appointment of respondent No.4. The court considered the submissions of the petitioner's counsel that the termination was illegal as it was effected before the completion of the probation period and without any inquiry. The court held that the termination was illegal and violative of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. The court allowed the petition, quashed the termination order, and directed the Management to reinstate the petitioner with continuity of service and back wages. The appointment of respondent No.4 was made subject to the result of the petition and was set aside.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Termination - Probation - Sections 5, 7 Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - Petitioner was appointed on probation for one academic year but was terminated before completion of probation period without any inquiry - Court held that termination during probation without completing the period and without inquiry is illegal and violative of the Act - Management directed to reinstate petitioner with continuity of service and back wages (Paras 1-10).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the termination of the petitioner's services without completing the probation period and without any inquiry is legal and valid.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

Petition allowed. Termination order quashed. Management directed to reinstate petitioner with continuity of service and back wages. Appointment of respondent No.4 set aside.

Law Points

  • Probation period must be completed before termination
  • Termination without inquiry is illegal
  • Appointment of substitute during pendency of petition is subject to result
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2014 LawText (BOM) (08) 18

Writ Petition No.3101 of 2001

2014-08-28

RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

Mr.S.R.Barlinge for petitioner; Mr.S.G.Rudrawar for respondent Nos.1 and 2; Mr.V.V.Bhavthankar for respondent No.4; Mrs.R.K.Ladda, A.G.P. for State

Vijaya d/o Vithalrao Ingle, alias Vijaya w/o Pandharinath Surywanshi

Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Shikshan Sanstha, Omerga, through its Secretary; The Head Mistress, Kanya High School, Omerga; The Education Officer, (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad; Shri J.B.Gaikwad

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging termination of service and appointment of substitute teacher.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought quashing of termination order and reinstatement with continuity and back wages.

Filing Reason

Petitioner was terminated before completion of probation period and without inquiry.

Previous Decisions

Petition was admitted on 05/09/2001 and appointment of respondent No.4 was made subject to result of petition.

Issues

Whether termination of petitioner's services during probation period without inquiry is legal. Whether appointment of respondent No.4 during pendency of petition is valid.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that she was appointed on probation for one academic year and was terminated before completion of probation without any inquiry. Petitioner also argued that she was made to sign blank papers which could be used to show resignation.

Ratio Decidendi

Termination of an employee during probation period without completing the probation and without any inquiry is illegal and violative of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977.

Judgment Excerpts

By an order dated 05/09/2001, this petition was admitted. Rule was expedited. The appointment of respondent No.4 made by the Management pursuant to the termination of the petitioner on the post which she had previously occupied, was made subject to the result of this petition.

Procedural History

Petition filed in 2001, admitted on 05/09/2001, and decided on 28/08/2014.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977: 5, 7
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition of B.Ed. College Challenging University's Ban on Admissions Due to Staff and Infrastructure Deficiencies. University's decision to stop admissions for academic year 2012-13 upheld as a protective measure for stude...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Teacher's Petition Against Termination and Appointment of Substitute. Management's failure to complete probation period and termination without inquiry violates Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service)...