Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Mangesh Balkrushnaji Deshmukh, was appointed as an Assistant Teacher at Shri Vinayak School, Marki, run by Shri Vinayak Shikshan Sanstha, Amravati. His appointment was against a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe and Nomadic Tribe candidates. Since no suitable candidate from those categories was available, the petitioner, who belonged to the Other Backward Class, was appointed on a temporary basis. He did not possess the qualification prescribed in the advertisement for the post. Subsequently, his services were terminated by an order dated 13.08.1999. The petitioner filed an appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 before the School Tribunal, Amravati, which dismissed the appeal on 29.07.2005. The Tribunal held that the petitioner was not qualified for the post as per the advertisement, his appointment was purely temporary against a reserved post due to non-availability of a reserved category candidate, and therefore his initial appointment could not be treated as on probation so as to confer deemed confirmation. The petitioner then filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. The petitioner's counsel argued that the management's stand was that the appointment was against a reserved post and since no reserved category candidate was available, the appointment should be treated as on probation for two years, relying on the decision in Bhartiya Buddha Dhamma Dnyan Vidyalaya v. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nagpur (2010 (3) Mh.L.J. 177). The High Court, after hearing the parties, found no merit in the petition. The Court noted that the petitioner lacked the prescribed qualification and his appointment was temporary due to non-availability of a reserved category candidate. Therefore, the appointment could not be treated as on probation, and no deemed confirmation could arise. The writ petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Service - Appointment Against Reserved Post - The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher against a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe and Nomadic Tribe candidates, but he belonged to Other Backward Class and did not possess the qualification prescribed in the advertisement. The School Tribunal held that the appointment was purely temporary due to non-availability of a suitable candidate from the reserved category, and thus the petitioner could not claim deemed confirmation. The High Court upheld this finding, dismissing the writ petition. (Paras 1-3) B) Service Law - Probation - Deemed Confirmation - Temporary Appointment - The petitioner argued that his appointment should be treated as on probation for two years, relying on the case of Bhartiya Buddha Dhamma Dnyan Vidyalaya v. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nagpur. However, the Court found that the appointment was temporary and not on probation, as the petitioner lacked the required qualification and was appointed only due to non-availability of a reserved category candidate. Hence, no deemed confirmation could arise. (Paras 2-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner's appointment as an Assistant Teacher against a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe and Nomadic Tribe candidates, without possessing the prescribed qualification, can be treated as on probation so as to confer deemed confirmation in service under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977.
Final Decision
The writ petition is dismissed. The judgment and order of the School Tribunal dated 29.07.2005 is upheld.
Law Points
- Appointment against reserved post without requisite qualification is temporary
- not on probation
- Deemed confirmation not applicable to temporary appointments
- School Tribunal's findings on qualifications and nature of appointment upheld
