1984 (12) TMI 269 - SC - Indian Laws

Termination of service of the Headmaster of the School Shri Manmohan Singh Jaitla and the drawing teacher Amir Singh as no longer required - Held that - Petition allowed - order terminating the service of Headmaster Manmohan Singh Jaitla is quashed and set aside as also the decisions of the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner and the Judgment of the High Court are quashed and set aside & reinstated in service with continuity in service and full backwages subject to the fact that if backwages have been paid under the orders of this Court, credit may be given for the same. Rule is made absolute in the writ petition filed by Drawing Teacher Amir Singh and the order terminating his service is quashed and set aside as also the orders of the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner and he is reinstated in service with continuity in service with back-wages. The respondent-School management shall pay the costs to both the employees separately quantified in each case at Rs 1, 500.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Termination of services of the Headmaster and Drawing Teacher.
2. Applicability of the Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1969.
3. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution.
4. Malafide actions by the new Managing Committee.
5. Validity of the termination orders.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Termination of Services of the Headmaster and Drawing Teacher:
The Guru Nanak Khalsa High School, an aided institution governed by the Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1969, terminated the services of the Headmaster, Shri Manmohan Singh Jaitla, and the Drawing Teacher, Amir Singh. The terminations were based on agreements executed with the school management. The school receives 95% of its expenses as a government grant.

2. Applicability of the Punjab Aided Schools (Security of Service) Act, 1969:
The 1969 Act mandates that no employee shall be dismissed, removed, or reduced in rank without an inquiry. The Deputy Commissioner must confirm such orders, and an appeal can be made to the Commissioner. Both the Deputy Commissioner and the Commissioner upheld the terminations based on the agreements, ignoring the mandatory inquiry provisions of the 1969 Act.

3. Jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227 of the Constitution:
The High Court initially declined relief, stating that the school was not an 'other authority' under Article 12 and thus not amenable to writ jurisdiction. However, the Supreme Court clarified that the Deputy Commissioner and Commissioner, being statutory quasi-judicial authorities under the 1969 Act, fall within the High Court's supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227.

4. Malafide Actions by the New Managing Committee:
The Supreme Court noted the malafide intentions of the new Managing Committee, which terminated the services of the Headmaster and Drawing Teacher shortly after taking over. The terminations were seen as punitive and a colorable exercise of power, aiming to remove individuals appointed by the previous management. The Court emphasized that agreements circumventing statutory protections are void.

5. Validity of the Termination Orders:
The Court found the termination orders unsustainable due to the lack of a mandatory inquiry and the malafide intentions behind them. The terminations were declared ab initio void. The Court reinstated both employees with continuity in service and full backwages.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal and the writ petition, quashing the termination orders and reinstating Shri Manmohan Singh Jaitla and Amir Singh with full backwages and continuity in service. The Court also awarded costs of Rs. 1,500 to each employee.