The main legal point established in the judgment is that the termination of services must adhere to the prescribed procedure under the Act and Rules, and failure to do so can result in the termination being unjustified and violative of the principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT

G.S.Sandhawalia, J. - The present judgment shall dispose of two letters patent appeals i.e. LPA Nos. 389 and 390 of 2018, as the same arise out of the similar orders passed by the Appellate Tribunal and a common order of the learned Single Judge. The present letters patent appeal has been filed by the employerschool against the order dated 08.12.2017 passed by the Appellate Tribunal comprising of the District Judge under the Haryana Education Act, 2003 and the subsequent order passed by the learned Single Judge in CWP Nos. 2310 of 2018 and 2335 of 2018 wherein, the writ petitions were dismissed in limine. The District Judge, Gurugram came to the conclusion that the employees who are husband and wife were confirmed employees in view of the letter dated 14.09.2005 and the termination done on 29.06.2015/21.07.2015 was done on the basis of the notices which had been issued prior to the amendment of the Staff Service Regulations. The show cause notices as such were issued whereby the performance of the employees was held to be sub-standard and the children of the school were not happy on account of which the notices had been served was the alleged ground for termination of services of the employees. The same having been scrutinized showed that there was only one month notice given whereas in the appointment letter dated 17.08.2004 and in the confirmation letter, the period of notice was required to be of 3 months. Resultantly, it was held that the action of the appellant-management was to the detriment to the interest of the employees and implementing the new terms and conditions for termination of services retrospectively though noticing that the school was a private autonomous body and was having liberty of having its own regulations and policy decisions. However, it was held that the policy of 'hire and fire' and of acting with whimsical and capricious attitude was detrimental to the employees and violative of the principles of natural justice. At least a regular domestic enquiry should have been initiated against the employees and they should have been given an opportunity to face and join inquiry before the services could be terminated on the principle of fair hearing, equity and justice. Resultantly, in the absence of the requisite three months' notice instead of one month before termination, the finding was recorded that the termination order was not justified and accordingly it was set aside since it was violative of the principles of natural justice. The couple was held entitled for reinstatement in service with immediate effect with full back wages/salary alongwith interest @6% per annum from the date of the termination of service i.e. from May, 2015 onwards till final realization.

2. The writ petitions filed, as noticed, were dismissed by the learned Single Judge in a terse manner while placing reliance upon the judgment of the co-ordinate Bench in the Management of S.D. Model Senior Secondary School and another vs. District Judge-cum-Service Tribunal and another, 2014 (13) RCR (Civil) 328 and the fact that the Apex Court in TMA Pai Foundation vs. State of Karnataka, (2002) 8 SCC 481 had directed constitution of Educational Tribunals. The argument raised as such that the power to set aside the dismissal order did not vest with the Tribunal was not accepted by holding that it would result in denuding the judicial power of the Tribunal to adjudicate the case. The argument that the Haryana School Education Code would govern was rejected on the ground that the Code does not deal with the service law disputes and it was held that there was no legal error in the order of the Tribunal. The argument that the contract inter se was of a personal service which was not specifically enforceable in law was rejected on the ground that in view of the statutory protection afforded to the employees of the private recognized schools in Haryana, all shades of service disputes are to be settled by the Tribunal.

3. Senior Counsel for th