High Court Of Allahabad
R.A.Sharma, J.
Riksh Pal Singh
Vs.
The Secretary, Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Board
Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 21840 of 1986
Decided On : Feb 14, 1990
EDUCATION - U. P. BASIC EDUCATION ACT, 1972 - SECTION 9 - U. P. RECOGNISED BASIC SCHOOL (JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS) (RECRUITMENT AND CONDITIONS OF SERVICE OF TEACHERS) RULES, 1978 - RULE 4 AND 5 - APPOINTMENT OF TEACHERS IN JUNIOR HIGH SCHOOLS - QUALIFICATION - TERMINATION OF SERVICE - VALIDITY.
Fact of the Case:
Petitioner, an Assistant Teacher in a Junior High School, challenged the termination of his service on the ground that he lacked the requisite training certificate, which was made a mandatory qualification by the U. P. Recognised Basic School (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (the Rules). The petitioner was appointed in 1968, before the Rules were enacted, and his appointment was confirmed in 1979.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that the Rules were prospective in nature and did not affect appointments made before their commencement. The court further held that the Act and the Rules did not provide for the transfer of management of Junior High Schools to the Government or the Education Board, nor did they curtail the managerial power of the school's management. The court also held that the termination of the petitioner's service was without jurisdiction as there was no provision in the Act or the Rules for screening out teachers on the ground of lack of qualification.
Issues: 1. Whether the Rules could be applied retrospectively to terminate the petitioner's service, which was validly made before their enactment? 2. Whether the Act and the Rules provided for the transfer of management of Junior High Schools to the Government or the Education Board, and whether they curtailed the managerial power of the school's management?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Rules were prospective in nature and did not affect appointments made before their commencement. 2. The Act and the Rules did not provide for the transfer of management of Junior High Schools to the Government or the Education Board, nor did they curtail the managerial power of the school's management. 3. The termination of the petitioner's service was without jurisdiction as there was no provision in the Act or the Rules for screening out teachers on the ground of lack of qualification.
Final Decision: The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the orders of termination of the petitioner's service, and directed the respondents to reinstate him as Assistant Teacher in the school.
A.Sharma, J.
1. Petitioner, who is an Assistant Teacher in Kisan Junior High school Bhurni, Khatipur P. O. Laksar, district Saharanpur (herein-after referred to as the school), claim to have been appointed on this post on 1-4-1968 by the committee of management of the school. In 1972 the U. P. Basic Education Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was enacted by the State of U. P. so as to provide for establishment of U. P. Board of Basic Education and the matter connected therewith. In pursuance of the Act the Government of U. P. framed Rules known as U. P. Recognised Basic School (Junior High Schools) (Recruitment and Conditions of Service of Teachers) Rules, 1978 (herein-after referred to as the Rules) for governing conditions of service of teachers working in Junior High Schools in the State.
2. Before the Rules were framed, there was no statutory rules regulating the conditions of service of teachers in Junior High Schools. After the framing of the Rules the management of the school submitted the names of the teachers working in the school for approval by the District Basic Education Officer (herein-after referred to as the Education Officer), Saharanpur. The petitioner's appointment was confirmed by the Education Officer vide order dated 7-9-1979 with effect from 1-7-1972.
The Education Officer vide letter dated 17-9-1984 asked the petitioner to show cause as to why his appointment be not cancelled. The petitioner submitted his reply and thereafter the Education Officer vide his order dated 15-11-1984 approved the proposal of the management of the school for terminating the service of the petitioner. Consequently the management of the school issued orders of termination dated 16-11-1984 to the petitioner. The petitioner has filed this writ petition against the aforesaid orders of termination of his service.
3. The ground on which the petitioner's service has been terminated is that the petitioner does not have the certificate of teachers training course. At the time the petitioner was appointed in 1968 a training certificate was not one of the conditions for appointment to the post of Assistant Teacher in Junior High Schools. In fact there was no rule laying down the conditions of service for teachers of Junior High Schools. THEse Rules were framed for the first time in 1978. Rule 5 of the Rules lays down that no person shall be appointed as Assistant Teacher in the school unless he possesses the minimum qualification prescribed for the post. Rule 4 prescribed the qualification for the post of Assistant Teacher and one of the qualification is certificate of teachers training course.
4. The Act neither provides for transfer of management of Junior High Schools to the Government or the Education Board nor does curtail the managerial power of the management of these schools. Section 9 of the Act provides for transfer of the employees serving under a local body exclusively in connection with the basic schools and after transfer these employees to hold office by the same tenure, at the same remuneration and upon the same other terms and conditions of service as they would have held the same if the Board had not been constituted. This section further provides for option to these employees to opt out of the service of the Board within two months from the appointed date. So far as the private schools are concernad, there is no such provision in the Act or Rules framed thereunder for transfer of the employees of these schools to the Government or to the Board. The management of these private schools has been left untouched by the Act and the Rules. Only in 1978 for the first time Rules were framed regulating the conditions of service of the teachers working in Junior High Schools but the power to appoint these teachers remains with the management of these schools. The Act and the Rules framed thereunder do not deal with services of the employees including the teachers of these schools, who were appointed before framing of
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.