Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from repeated termination of a permanent Assistant Teacher by a school management without holding disciplinary enquiry. Respondent No.1 was appointed on 16-06-1997 as an Assistant Teacher in a fully aided Urdu medium school, holding H.S.C. and D.Ed. qualifications. Her services were approved by the Education Officer. In 2000, a dispute began between employees and management over forged salary withdrawals, leading to salary stoppage. Respondent No.1 obtained continuation of salary through Writ Petition No.494 of 2010. On 16-04-2013, the management issued a notice alleging that she had submitted a bogus caste certificate for an OBC reserved post. She denied the allegation, stating she was appointed on a general category post. On 27-04-2013, the management terminated her without any enquiry. She filed Appeal No.28 of 2013 before the School Tribunal, which allowed the appeal on 25-08-2016, holding the termination illegal and permitting the management to conduct an enquiry if desired. The management challenged this in Writ Petition No.10477 of 2016, but the High Court dismissed the petition on 16-11-2016, finding that the appointment order showed the respondent was never appointed on a reserved post and that the management had surreptitiously modified the category. Respondent No.1 was reinstated, but the management terminated her again on 21-01-2020 on the same ground of alleged unlawful appointment. She filed Appeal No.09 of 2020 before the School Tribunal. During its pendency, she superannuated. The Tribunal allowed the appeal on 29-02-2024, setting aside the termination. The management and headmaster filed the present writ petition challenging that order. The High Court noted that the petitioner suppressed the earlier High Court order, which the employee exposed. The petitioner contended that Respondent No.1 belonged to OBC category, failed to produce caste certificate, and committed fraud. The respondent argued that she was appointed through general category, services were approved and never revoked, and the management acted with personal grudge. The Education Officer submitted that termination was without permission and management was responsible for backwages. The Court rejected the petitioner's contentions, relying on the earlier High Court finding that the appointment was on an open category post and the management had modified the category behind the employee's back. It held that a permanent employee cannot be terminated without enquiry under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and Rules, 1981. The Court also found no perversity in the Tribunal's findings and observed that the petitioner lacked clean hands. Accordingly, the writ petition was dismissed and the Tribunal's order setting aside termination was affirmed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Permanent Employee - Requirement of Disciplinary Enquiry - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and Rules, 1981 - A permanent assistant teacher in a fully aided school cannot be terminated without holding a disciplinary enquiry; the School Tribunal correctly set aside the termination for lack of enquiry. Held that the termination was illegal and without jurisdiction. (Paras 1-4, 6) B) Service Law - Appointment and Eligibility - Open Category versus Reserved Category - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - The School Management forwarded a proposal for approval against an OBC category post though the appointment order showed an open/general category post; the employee was not guilty of fraud. Held that the respondent was lawfully appointed and the management could not convert her appointment behind her back. (Paras 4, 6) C) Writ Jurisdiction - Judicial Review of Findings of Fact - Scope of Supervisory Jurisdiction - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - Findings of fact recorded by the School Tribunal are not to be interfered with unless perverse or erroneous; reliance placed on Syed Yakoob v. K.S. Radhakrishnan and Others, AIR 1964 SC 477 and Surya Dev Rai v. Ram Chander Rai, (2003) 6 SCC 682. Held that the petitioner failed to show any perversity in the Tribunal's findings. (Paras 6(c), 6(f)) D) Service Law - Backwages and Arrears - Liability of Management - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - Termination without permission from the Education Officer rendered the Management liable for backwages and arrears; the approval was never revoked. Held that the Management is responsible for payment of backwages and arrears. (Paras 5(h), 6) E) Practice and Procedure - Abuse of Process - Suppression of Material Fact - Constitution of India, 1950, Article 226 - The petitioner suppressed an earlier High Court order even while relying on it, and the employee exposed the suppression. Held that the petitioner lacked clean hands and was not entitled to equitable relief. (Paras 1, 5(g))
Issue of Consideration
Whether the School Tribunal's order setting aside termination of Respondent No.1 was legal and proper; whether the termination of a permanent teacher without enquiry under Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 was valid; whether Respondent No.1's appointment was lawful and not obtained by fraud; whether the petitioner suppressed previous order and lacked clean hands
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, affirmed the School Tribunal's order setting aside termination, held that Respondent No.1 was lawfully appointed and termination without enquiry was illegal. The Court also observed that the petitioner suppressed the earlier order and lacked clean hands.
Law Points
- Termination of permanent employee in aided private school requires disciplinary enquiry under Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act
- 1977
- High Court cannot reappreciate factual findings unless perverse
- approval by Education Officer establishes legality of appointment
- school management cannot unilaterally convert open category appointment to reserved category behind employee's back
- suppression of earlier court order disentitles relief
