9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (9) TMI 1137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1978 (hereinafter referred to as the Rules). In the year 1984, a post of Assistant Teacher in the institution fell vacant. The Management of the institution advertised the said vacancy and invited applications for appointment to the said post. Appellant No. 1, and others, in response to the said advertisement submitted applications and for that purpose a Selection Committee was constituted in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Appellant No. 1 was selected and recommended by the Selection Committee for appointment as Assistant Teacher. The Management, by a resolution dated 24.6.85, resolved to appoint appellant No. 1 on probation for a period of one year. Consequently, appellant No. 1 joined the service at Madhyamika Vidyalaya Mattiwade w.e.f 1.7.85 on a pay scale of ₹ 750/- to ₹ 1,500/-. It is alleged that appellant No. 1 continued to teach till June 1994 when he was prevented by the Management of the School from performing his teaching assignment. Similarly, appellant No. 2 after having been selected by the Selection Committee constituted under the provisions of the rules was appointed as Assistant Teacher in the institution on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the appellants as Assistant Teacher in the institution, the view taken by the High Court is erroneous. Secondly, that the method of appointment and conditions of service of teachers in private government aided institution being governed by the provisions of the Act and Rules framed thereunder, any requirement of approval of regular appointments of teachers under the non-statutory administrative orders contained in grant-in aid code would not make the appointments of the appellants invalid. Thirdly, that the appellants having been appointed on probation, the appellants automatically became confirmed teachers of the institution after completion of their probationary period and fourthly, that, in any case, there being no provision under the Rules for automatic termination of service in the event of the teacher being absent, the alleged automatic termination of service of the appellants is illegal. Whereas, learned counsel appearing for the respondent urged that the grant-in-aid rules, though may be administrative in nature, it provides for requirement of obtaining approval of the Inspecting Officer in the matter of appointment of teachers in the government aided institutions and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e institution consisting of- (i) the President or the Head of the Board of Management or his nominee; (ii) the Head of the Department or his nominee; (iii) the Head of the Institution; (iv) an educationist or an expert in the subject to which recruitment is to be made, to be selected by the Board of Management from a panel of names furnished by the Head of the Department. A perusal of Rule 6 would show that there is no requirement for Management to take any approval from the Head of the Department who is the Director of Public Instructions, in respect of regular appointment of a teacher selected by the Selection Committee constituted under sub-rule (2) of Rule 6 of the Rules. Whereas, under sub-rule (5) of Rule 6, if the Management appoints any teacher for a period of 3 months or less, or for part time, such an appointment is required to have the approval by the Head of the Department. It appears that the omission to obtain approval of Head of the Department in case of a regular teacher under the rules is deliberate. Reason being that the Head of the Department himself or his nominee sits in the Selection Committee and it is because of that reason, the approval of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt the rules by issuing administrative instructions or orders. In the absence of such provision in the Act, it is not open to the government to supplement the rules by the executive orders. If we accept the argument of learned counsel for the respondent, it would be repugnant to Sections 3 and 15 of the Act. The matter can be examined from another angle. Rule 16 of Grant-in- Aid Code for Secondary Schools runs as under: 16. General Conditions of aid:- Grant-in-aid is permissible only to those institutions which have been recognised by the Department. It is subject to the following conditions:- (i) The Management shall have deposited the stability fund as indicated in rule 9 (d) of Chapter III. (ii) The Management shall credit the prescribed fees collected, into the Treasury as prescribed in rule 69. The other amounts collected by way of grants, donations, interest on endowments, deposits, and other items realised by the institutions shall be credited to the accounts of the institution and shall be reflected in annual receipts and expenditure statement of the institution. Failure on the part of the Management or the Head of the Institution to collect and to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pplicable in the case of appointment of teacher in private government aided institutions. Yet, there is another reason why the non-statutory Rule 16 is not applicable in the case of appointment of teachers in the institution. The administrative instructions pertaining to grant-in-aid for secondary schools have been issued with the object of extending and improving institutions, and for that purpose a sum of money is annually allocated by the government for distribution as grant-in-aid to schools subject to observance to the conditions specified therein. The conditions embodies in Rule 16 of the grant-in-aid code provide for the conditions under which financial assistance would be made available to the Management of the institution by the government. If there is a breach of the conditions of the grants-in-aid, it is open to the government either to suspend or cancel the financial grant to the institution. But, such breach of conditions of the grant-in-aid code would not make the appointment of a teacher in the institutions invalid when the method of appointment of teachers in the institution is fully covered by the Act and the statutory rules. It is, however, true that for bre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
