The court established that termination of a teacher's employment requires prior approval from the competent authority, and failure to obtain such approval renders the termination illegal.

JUDGMENT :

A.S. SUPEHIA, J.

1. The present Letters Patent Appeal filed under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, 1865 emanates from the judgment and order dated 25.01.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge rejecting the writ petition with the costs of Rs.50,000/- filed by the appellant-Shri J. H. Shora Vidya Mandir Primary School.

2. Before we proceed on merits, it is reported to us that the respondent-Teacher is more than 75 years of age. He reached the age of superannuation on 01.06.2009. Till today, he is not paid a single penny of his retirement benefits or any benefits, as directed by the Tribunal (Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal). The respondent-teacher is embroiled in array of litigation, and there is checkered history. Though, he has been successful in the litigation, she has not enjoyed the fruits.

THE BRIEF FACTS

3. The respondent was serving as a Teacher in the appellant-School. It appears that on 14.06.1993, the appellant-School terminated 5 teachers including the present respondent. Accordingly, they filed Application No. 217 of 1993 and by the interim order, the Tribunal directed not to implement the order till further orders are passed. By the order dated 29.11.2004, the Tribunal directed the appellant-School to reinstate the respondent-Teacher along with other teachers. It was also further directed to pay them pay-scale and allowances, as per the Government standards.

4. The appellant-School filed a Review Application No. 02 of 2005, which was rejected on 24.03.2009. During the pendency of the review application, four teachers entered into compromise with the appellant-School except the respondent-Teacher. The rejection order dated 24.03.2009 was challenged by the Management by filing writ petition being Special Civil Application No. 13844 of 2012 before this Court, which was also rejected by the order dated 11.01.2013.

5. Again the respondent-Teacher was removed from service on 15.05.2006. The said removal was assailed by the respondent-Teacher by filing Application No. 68 of 2006 before the Tribunal. By the judgment and order dated 17.07.2012, the Tribunal set aside the action of the appellant-School of removing her from service on 15.05.2006 and further directed the appellant - School to pay all her retirement benefits. It is specifically recorded by the Tribunal that the provisions of Section 40B of the Gujarat Primary Education Rules, 1949 was violated. The said decision of the Tribunal dated 17.07.2012 was challenged by the appellant - School by filing writ petition before this Court being Special Civil Application No. 13845 of 2012, which was withdrawn on 12.12.2012 for filing a review before the Tribunal. Thereafter, the appellant-School filed a Review Application No. 1 of 2012 (New Review No. 24 of 2014), which was also rejected vide order dated 27.07.2021 by the Tribunal. In the meantime, the respondent-Teacher filed Execution Application No. 07 of 2005 (New No. 89 of 2014), wherein the Tribunal directed the appellant-School to pay an amount of Rs.10,51,743/- along with costs of Rs.5,000/-. The respondent-Teacher also filed Execution Application No. 17 of 2012 and the Tribunal directed to pay an amount of Rs.9,07,911/- along with costs of Rs.5,000/-. The appellant-School filed Review Application No. 03 of 2021 in Execution Application No. 89 of 2014 (Old Execution Application No. 7 of 2005). The same was rejected by the Tribunal by the order dated 28.09.2022. Thereafter, the appellant-School filed Review Application No. 5 of 2021 in New Execution Application No. 322 of 2014 which was also rejected by the order dated 28.09.2022. It appears that thereafter, again a review application was filed by the appellant-School being Restoration Application No. 5 of 2021 which was allowed by the Tribunal and ultimately, the Review Application No. 24 of 2014 was restored. Thereafter, the appellant-School filed the captioned writ petition challenging the order dated 23.12.2022 and 17.06.2012 passed by the Tribunal. The le