A temporary employee cannot claim permanence or reinstatement without valid appointment documentation under the MEPS Act, particularly if service is abandoned without proper leave.

JUDGMENT :

AARTI SATHE, J.

1. This Letters Patent Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27^th September 2007 (hereinafter referred to as “impugned order”) passed by the learned single judge in Writ Petition No. 3349/1998 allowing the Petition filed by the Respondent No.1 thereby quashing and setting aside the order of the school tribunal dated 18^th December 1996 on an appeal filed under Section 9(a) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service Regulation) Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as “MEPS Act”). By the aforesaid impugned order the Appellant Society/school was directed to reinstate Respondent No.1 in service with continuity of service and full back-wages.

2. Briefly the facts are:-

i. The Appellant Society/school is a fully government aided school having no other source of income except the annual grant received by them from the government. The Appellant Society/school utilizes this grant/aid received from the government for payment of salaries to the sanctioned strength of 16 teachers and 2 employees and the Appellant Society/school is not allowed to divert the said amount for any other purpose. On 12^th June 1989 Respondent No.1 was appointed as a temporary teacher in the Appellant Society/school as Respondent No.1 is qualified as B.A. B.Ed. It is however Respondent No.1’s contention that she was appointed against a clear permanent vacancy in the primary section. However without following the selection she came to be appointed purely on a temporary basis.

ii. After she joined the service, Respondent No.1 suffered from jaundice and was under treatment. On 14^th December 1991, i.e. the period of about 30 months from her appointment Respondent No.1 abandoned the service without informing the Appellant Society/school and thereafter never joined the service of Appellant Society/school. On 27^th December 1991, 6^th January 1992 and 27^th January 1992, the Appellant Society/school issued letters to Respondent No.1 calling upon her to resume her duty immediately, however to no avail.

iii. On 31^st January 1992 and 5^th March 1992 i.e. after a period of 48 days and three months respectively, from abandoning her service Respondent No.1 submitted medical certificates to the Appellant Society/school by Registered Post A.D. which were received by the Appellant Society/school on 5^th February 1992 and 14^th March 1992 respectively. However, it is the Appellant Society/school’s contention that the said medical certificates are not genuine and are disputed.

iv. According to the Appellant Society/school sometime in May/June 1992, Respondent No.1allegedly obtained an experience certificate from the headmistress of the Appellant Society/school to establish that she was working in the school till 30^th April 1992. It is Respondent No.1’s contention that termination was effective from 30^th April 1992 and that she had not abandoned her services in the year 1991. However, the experience certificate obtained by Respondent No.1 is being disputed by the Appellant Society/school and it is their contention that Respondent No.1 had abandoned services on 14^th December 1991. Thereafter on 6^th July 1992 Respondent No.1 addressed her grievance to the Deputy Director and Education Officer against her termination. On such backdrop, on 17^th July 1992 Respondent No.1 filed an appeal No. 53 of 1992 before the School Tribunal under Section 9(a) of the MEPS Act contending that she was appointed on a clear permanent vacancy and not on a temporary basis and hence the provisions of Section 5(2) of the MEPS Act were applicable in her case.

v. After a