The court upheld the principle that failure to adhere to natural justice, particularly the right to cross-examine key witnesses in disciplinary proceedings, invalidates termination, warranting reinstatement and back wages.

ORDER :

1. The instant appeal is under Section 15 of the Jharkhand Education Tribunal Act, 2004 directed against the judgment dated 03.08.2018 passed in A.C. (SB) No.15 of 2014 whereby and whereunder the appeal has been dismissed upholding the judgment passed by the Jharkhand Education Tribunal dated 01.09.2014 by which while allowing the appeal, the order of termination passed by the Chairman, Vidya Bharti Chinmaya Vidyalaya, Jamshedpur has been set aside with a direction upon the Management of the School to reinstate the petitioner (respondent herein) in service with 50% back wages and consequential benefits to which she would have been entitled had she not been unlawfully thrown out from service.

The said back wages have been directed to be paid within a period of three months from the date of passing of the said judgment and further the direction was passed for physical reinstatement in service within two weeks from the date of passing of the judgment.

2. The brief facts of the case require to be enumerated herein as per the pleading made before the Jharkhand Education Tribunal (hereinafter referred as the Tribunal).

3. It is the case of the respondent (applicant before the tribunal) that she was appointed as primary teacher on 01.04.2006. She was put under suspension in contemplation of the domestic enquiry. An enquiry officer was appointed after service of memorandum of charge so as to provide an opportunity to defend her case.

4. The Enquiry Officer has concluded the enquiry and found the charges to be proved. The enquiry report has been forwarded before the disciplinary authority. The disciplinary authority has issued the show cause along with the copy of the enquiry report and after following the procedure which was to be followed at that stage, the order of termination dated 08.06.2010 was passed.

5. The respondent has challenged the said order of termination before the Jharkhand Education Tribunal, Ranchi on the ground of violation of principle of natural justice by taking the plea that the place of enquiry has been changed without any information to the concerned delinquent and the first charge pertaining to implication in the criminal case has resulted into acquittal by the competent court of criminal jurisdiction.

6. Specific plea was taken that one witness, namely, Shri S. Velu, a teacher working in the school, has been made a management witness and his statement was recorded by the Enquiry Officer but subsequently he was not placed before the Enquiry Officer for his cross-examination even then the content of the statement in support of the charge has been accepted by the Enquiry Officer.

7. The learned Tribunal has called upon the Management. The Management has filed a detailed counter affidavit denying the aspersion so made of violation of principle of natural justice, rather, the ground has been agitated therein that all efforts had been taken to provide an opportunity of hearing said to be sufficient and adequate and it is the delinquent who has not availed that opportunity, reason best known to her.

8. The ground has been taken that at the belated stage the requisition was made to defend through Advocate and the said request was rejected on the pretext that the requisition for defending through