Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Amar Jaggnath Lavate, a teacher employed at Nutan Vidyalaya, Lote (now Kavita Vinod Saraf High School), was declared a surplus employee by the school management (Respondent Nos. 2 and 3) and the Education Officer (Respondent No. 1) passed an order dated 07.11.2023 directing his absorption in another school, Late Ravbahadur Bapusaheb Kdam Vidyalaya, Talvatpalata. The petitioner challenged these actions by filing a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus to declare the oral communication and orders as illegal and unconstitutional, and a writ of certiorari to quash them. The petitioner contended that the declaration of surplus and the absorption order were in contravention of Rule 26(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Employees Private School (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, which require that a surplus employee can only be absorbed with his consent and after following due procedure. The court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the Assistant Government Pleader, found that the impugned orders were passed without adhering to the statutory rules. The court held that the declaration of the petitioner as surplus and the direction for absorption were illegal and set aside both the oral communication/order of Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and the order dated 07.11.2023 of Respondent No. 1. The court directed the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in the same school. The writ petition was allowed with rule made absolute.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Surplus Employee - Declaration and Absorption - Rule 26(1) and (2) of Maharashtra Employees Private School (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 - The petitioner, a teacher in a private school, was declared surplus by the school management and the Education Officer directed his absorption in another school without following the procedure under Rule 26, which requires consent of the employee and opportunity of hearing. The Court held that the impugned orders are illegal and quashed them, directing the respondents to allow the petitioner to continue in the same school. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the declaration of the petitioner as a surplus employee and the subsequent order of absorption passed by the Education Officer are in contravention of Rule 26(1) and (2) of the Maharashtra Employees Private School (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the impugned oral communication and order passed by Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 declaring the petitioner as surplus, and quashed the order dated 07.11.2023 passed by Respondent No. 1 directing absorption. The respondents were directed to allow the petitioner to continue in the same school. Rule made absolute.
Law Points
- Surplus employee declaration must follow Rule 26(1) and (2) of Maharashtra Employees Private School (Conditions of Service) Rules
- 1981
- Absorption without consent or hearing is illegal
- Mandamus and Certiorari available for violation of statutory rules
