Back
1986 Supreme(Gau) 110
GAUHATI HIGH COURT
B.L.Hansaria, K.N.Saikia, JJ.
Paul Petta -Appellant
Versus
Director of Public Instructions, Government of Meghalaya and Others -Respondent
Civil Rule No. 428 of 1986
Decided On : 12-09-1986
S.K.Homchoudhuri, S.Dutta, P.k.Goswami, N.Dutta, Meghalaya, K.K.Dey, D.N.Choudhury, A.Sarma, A.M.Mazumdar
Headnote:
EDUCATION - Minority Educational Institution - Right to Administer - Scope and Extent - Transfer of Principal - Whether violative of Article 30 of the Constitution of India - Principles of Natural Justice - Applicability to Minority Institutions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a priest and member of the Salesian Don Bosco Organization, was appointed as Principal of St. Anthony's College, Shillong, a minority educational institution. The appointment was made in accordance with the Government instructions issued by the Government of Meghalaya, which stated that the Governing Body of the College shall select a Principal from a panel of names submitted by the sponsoring Church Organization. The petitioner alleged that after taking over as Principal, he found serious mismanagement and irregularities in the College and took appropriate steps to rectify them. This led to differences with the Church authorities, who insisted on giving preference to Catholic students in admission. The petitioner also placed the audit report for the period from 1977-78 to 1983-84 before the Governing Body. Subsequently, the President of the Governing Body issued a letter transferring the petitioner from the post of Principal and appointing another person in his place. The petitioner challenged this transfer order, contending that it was illegal and violative of his rights under Article 30 of the Constitution of India and the principles of natural justice.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the College was an educational institution established and managed by a religious minority body, namely, the Salesian Don Bosco Organization. The Government instructions issued by the Government of Meghalaya were applicable to the College, subject to the rights of administration vested in the minority body as conferred by Article 30 of the Constitution of India. The Court further held that the Assam Aided College Management Rules, 1965 and the Assam Aided College Employees Rules, 1960 were applicable to the College, subject to the Government instructions and the rights of administration vested in the minority body. The Court also held that the right to administer a minority educational institution includes the right to choose its managing or governing body, to choose its teachers, not to be compelled to refuse admission to students, to use its properties and assets for the benefit of the institution, and to maintain the educational character and standard of the institution. However, this right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable regulations for the institution as the vehicle of education for the minority community concerned, consistent with the national interest. The Court further held that the transfer of the petitioner from the post of Principal without giving him an opportunity to be heard was violative of the principles of natural justice. The Court directed the Governing Body of the College to give the petitioner an opportunity to show cause as to why he should not be transferred and to decide the matter of transfer within one month from the receipt of the order.
Issues: 1. Whether the College was a minority educational institution entitled to the protection of Article 30 of the Constitution of India? 2. Whether the Assam Aided College Management Rules, 1965 and the Assam Aided College Employees Rules, 1960 were applicable to the College? 3. Whether the right to administer a minority educational institution includes the right to transfer the Principal? 4. Whether the transfer of the petitioner from the post of Principal without giving him an opportunity to be heard was violative of the principles of natural justice?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The right to administer a minority educational institution includes the right to choose its managing or governing body, to choose its teachers, not to be compelled to refuse admission to students, to use its properties and assets for the benefit of the institution, and to maintain the educational character and standard of the institution. However, this right is not absolute and is subject to reasonable regulations for the institution as the vehicle of education for the minority community concerned, consistent with the national interest. 2. The transfer of the petitioner from the post of Principal without giving him an opportunity to be heard was violative of the principles of natural justice.
Final Decision: The Court allowed the petition and directed the Governing Body of the College to give the petitioner an opportunity to show cause as to why he should not be transferred and to decide the matter of transfer within one month from the receipt of the order.
Ubi aliquid conecditur, conceditur et Ld sine quo res ipsa esse non potest- when anything is granted, that also is granted without which the thing granted cannot exist. When the right to administer an educational institution of one's own choice is granted, that also is granted without which the right to administer cannot exist. What is the extent of the right given by Article 30 of the Constitution of India to minorities based on religion to administer educational institutions of their choice established by them I Can such minorities administer such an institution entirely in accordance with their religious rules and commitments even when those are in conflict with the rights which the employees of similar but non-minority educational institutions would have earned I Would it make any defference when the employees are, and when they are not members of the religious body itself ? Are these bodies subject to the principles of natural justice while administering such an institution ? These are some of the precise questions that arise in this writ petition under the following facts and circumstances.
2. The St. Anthony's College, Shillong, hereinafter referred to as ' the College', was established by Salesian Don Bosco in 1934 to impart general education under the then curriculum of Calcutta University, to which the College was affiliated. After the establishment of Gauhati University the College was affiliated to Gauhati University. Since the establishment of the North Eastern Hill University in 1973 the College has been affiliated to that University.
3. The College has since long been receiving Government grants-in-aid. Since the scheme of deficit grant-in-aid to colleges was introduced by the Government of Assam in 1959, the College had been receiving grants under the system. After creation of Meghalaya also it has been receiving grants-in-aid under the same system as adopted by the Government of Meghalaya.
4. While particulars about the system of appointments made in the College during the earlier period have not been furnished, it is stated that by Memo No. EDN. 75/74/280 dated 4th Nov. 1976 (Annexure 7 to the petition), the Government of Meghalaya, Education Department conveyed to the Director of Public Instruction, for short. D. P. I., the sanction of the Governor of Meghalaya to the implementation of the U. G. C. Scales of pay, as indicated there under, for all the deficit College teachers in the State with effect from 1st April, 1975, The Principal, Professors and other staff of the College were given the U. G. C. scale. By Memo No. EDN. 75/74/51 dated 7th Dec. 1979 (Annexurs 8 to the petition) the Government of Meghalaya, Education & Sports Department intimated the D.P.I.. Meghalaya the Government's decision on the procedure of appointment of Principal, Vice-Principal, Lecturers and other staff in religious minority college in the State with reference to Article 30 of the Constitution of India. Paragraph 1 of this Memo reads :
"1. In the matter of appointment of Principals and Vice-principals in the colleges belonging to the religious minorities, the Governing Body of the College concerned shall select a Principal and vice-principal from a penal of names submitted by the sponsoring Church Organisation concerned, subject to the conditions that the educational qualifications of the persons selected shall be in accordance with the conditions laid down in the Government's letter No. EDN/75/74/280 dated 4.11.76. Other conditions in respect of age of superannuation etc. shall be as prescribed by the State Government from time to time."
Thus, appointment of a qualified Principal was to be made by the Governing Body of the College from a panel of names submitted by the Church organisation, and the age of superannuation shall be prescribed by the State Government from time to time. Superannuation of the incumbent in the College was therefore envisaged in the Memo.
5. It is admitted that besides the aforesaid Memo
