SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
D.A. Desai, V. Khalid, JJ.
Manmohan Singh Jaitla - Appellant
Versus
The Commissioner, Union Territory, Chandigarh - Respondent
Amir Singh - Appellant
Versus
Deputy Commissioner - Respondent
Civil Appeal No. 2137 of 1984 WITH Writ Petition No. 11238 of 1983
Decided On : 19-12-1984
Constitution of India, 1950 - Articles 12, 32 and 227 - Punjab Aided Schools Act, 1969 - Section 3 - Expenses As Grant - Contribution Of Expenses Claims - Admittedly school receives of its expenses as grant from government and for contribution of expenses claims thoroughly arbitrary powers to be presently pointed out which appears to be anachronistic - Action of managing committee of school in dispensing with services of both aforementioned persons is questioned in these two matters on more or less identical grounds and therefore they were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment - Pursuant to an advertisement inviting application for post of headmaster of school appellant applied for same - He was interviewed and on same day by order of same date he was offered post of headmaster in school in prescribed scale with usual allowances sanctioned by education department administration for grant-in-aid schools - Order of appointment provided that appointee will be on probation for a period of one year and that he will be required to enter into an agreement with school - Appellant accepted appointment order and joined service – Held, Therefore only distinguishable feature of this case with case of headmaster is that no charge-sheet was served upon petitioner teacher - Save and except this difference all reasons which weighed with us in quashing order of termination of service of headmaster would mutatis mutandis apply to case of this drawing teacher - To restate these reasons would merely add to length of this judgment - As a corollary rule will have to be made absolute after quashing and setting aside order of termination of service and directing reinstatement of drawing teacher in service with continuity in service with full backwages - Accordingly CA is allowed and order terminating service of headmaster is quashed and set aside as also decisions of deputy commissioner and commissioner and judgment of high court are quashed and set aside - Appellant headmaster is reinstated in service with continuity in service and full backwages subject to fact that if backwages have been paid under orders of this court credit may be given for same - Appeal Allowed.
JUDGMENT :
D.A. Desai, J.
Guru Nanak Khalsa High School ('School' for short) an aided school and hence governed by The Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1969 ('1969 Act' for short) in its application to the Union territory of Chandigarh dispensed with the service of the Headmaster of the School, appellant Shri Manmohan Singh Jaitla, and the drawing teacher Amir Singh claiming to exercise power under an agreement executed by each of them with the management of the school. Admittedly, the school receives 95% of its expenses as grant from the Government and for contribution 5% of the expenses claims thoroughly arbitrary powers to be presently pointed out which appears to be anachronistic. The action of the Managing Committee of the school in dispensing with the services of both the aforementioned persons is questioned in these two matters on more or less identical grounds and therefore they were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment.
In Re : C.A. No. 2137/84 :
2. Pursuant to an advertisement inviting application for the post of Headmaster of the School, appellant-Shri Manmohan Singh Jaitla applied for the same. He was interviewed on March 28, 1976 and on the same day by the order of the same date, he was offered the post of Headmaster in the school in the prescribed scale with usual allowances sanctioned by the Education Department, Chandigarh Administration for grant-in-aid Schools. The order of appointment provided that the appointee will be on probation for a period of one year and that he will be required to enter into an agreement with the school. The appellant accepted the appointment order and joined service. As required by the regulations of the Education Department of Chandigarh Administration, his appointment was subject to confirmation by the Director of Public Instruction. The confirmation was granted as per the order dated August 11, 1976. By the resolution of the Managing Committee of the School dated June 2, 1977, the appellant was confirmed with effect from May 1, 1977 in post as the Headmaster. In token of the appreciation of the outstanding performance of the appellant as Headmaster in the field of academic work/co-curricular activities and administration during the session 1980-81, he was awarded a certificate of honour by the Finance and Education Secretary, Union Territory of Chandigarh, on August 10, 1981. It appears that the term of the earlier Managing Committee expired and a new Managing Committee took over with effect from March 24,1982. On January 31, 1983, the Education Managing Committee of the school informed the appellant that his services were no longer required with effect from that very day i.e. January 1983 and in terms of Condition No. (iii) of the agreement entered into by him, he would cease to be in the employment of the school and was directed to hand over charge to Mrs. Gurcharan Kaur. The appellants application for relief to the Deputy Commissioner under sub-section (2) of Section 3 of the 1969 Act was turned down. After an unsuccessful appeal to the Commissioner, the appellant approached the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh under Article 227 of the Constitution. The High Court rejected the writ petition in limine but by a speaking order observing that as the school cannot be said to be 'other authority' under Article 12 of the Constitution, it was not amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court. Hence this appeal by special leave.
In Re : W.P. No. 11238/83 :
3. Petitioner Amir Singh was appointed by the Managing Committee of the School on March 21, 1976 as a Drawing Teacher as per the appointment order No. 1265 dated March 21, 1976. This appointment was made upon an application made by the petitioner and after he was interviewed by the concerned committee of the school. The appointment order spells out some of the conditions of appointment, one of them may be noticed. The appointee had to enter into an agreement with the management of the
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.