Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Dr. Antonio Da Silva Technical High School and Junior College and its managing trust, are a non-aided minority educational institution. They challenged an order dated 21 February 2015 passed by the Director of Vocational Education & Training (Respondent No.3) refusing to grant approval for the appointment of Respondent No.6, Mrs. Archana Swapnil Gonsalves, as a teacher. The Director refused approval on the ground that the selection was not made from the pool of candidates sponsored by the employment exchange, as required under Rule 9(7) to 9(10) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (MEPS Rules). The petitioners contended that the MEPS Rules are not applicable to non-aided minority institutions, which enjoy autonomy under Article 30(1) of the Constitution. They also argued that no proper opportunity of hearing was given before passing the order. The court, after hearing both sides, held that the MEPS Rules, particularly the provisions regarding recruitment through employment exchange, do not apply to non-aided minority institutions. The court quashed the impugned order and directed the Director to reconsider the approval of the appointment without applying the MEPS Rules, and to pass a fresh order within four weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The court also noted that the order was passed in violation of natural justice.
Headnote
A) Constitution Law - Minority Educational Institutions - Article 30(1) - Autonomy in Appointments - The Director of Vocational Education & Training refused to approve appointment of a teacher in a non-aided minority school on the ground that the selection was not made from the pool of candidates sponsored by the employment exchange as per Rule 9(7) to 9(10) of MEPS Rules. The Court held that the MEPS Rules are not applicable to non-aided minority institutions, as they are entitled to autonomy under Article 30(1) of the Constitution. The impugned order was quashed and the Director was directed to reconsider the approval without applying the MEPS Rules. (Paras 2-6) B) Service Law - Appointment - Approval - Natural Justice - The impugned order was passed without giving proper opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. The Court noted that the order was passed in violation of principles of natural justice. (Para 2) C) Constitution Law - Minority Educational Institutions - Applicability of MEPS Rules - The Court clarified that the MEPS Rules, particularly Rule 9(7) to 9(10), which require recruitment through employment exchange, do not apply to non-aided minority institutions. Such institutions have the right to appoint teachers of their choice under Article 30(1). (Paras 4-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether Rule 9(7) to 9(10) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 are applicable to non-aided minority educational institutions in the matter of appointment of teaching staff.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 21 February 2015 is quashed and set aside. The Director of Vocational Education & Training (Respondent No.3) is directed to reconsider the proposal for approval of appointment of Respondent No.6 afresh without applying the MEPS Rules, and pass a fresh order within four weeks from the date of receipt of the order, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.
Law Points
- Minority educational institutions have autonomy in appointments under Article 30(1)
- MEPS Rules do not apply to non-aided minority institutions
- Director's order without hearing is violative of natural justice
