Bombay High Court reinstates school employee, calls sacking arbitrary

After more than a decade of unemployment and struggle, the Bombay High Court has recently reinstated a past employee who was illegally terminated from his employment, where he had rendered 10 years of “unblemished” service.

Justice Milind N Jadhav was hearing a plea filed by a man who was illegally terminated from his employment and held that the case presented required urgent interference of the court and reinstated the petitioner, awarding full back wages for the entire period of his unemployment.

“This is a clear case of high-handedness and arbitrariness exercised by Respondent No.1 – Trust and NES High School. It clearly borders on illegality and exploitation without regard to the due process of law,” the June 8 order read.

Justice Milind N Jadhav observed that abruptly on oral termination the petitioner was relieved from his services which was in complete defiance of the due process of law.

‘Flagrant violation of due process of law’

Holding the termination to be illegal, the Bombay High Court observed that “no departmental enquiry was held for petitioner’s termination, no show cause notice is issued containing reasons therein, no charge has been framed, no inquiry officer was appointed and no statement was recorded.”

It was further noted by the court that the trust had not complied with the statutory requirement of issuing a statutory one-month notice for terminating services of a temporary employee, as given in the MEPS Rules, and the list of reasons for termination was also not provided as mandated by the MEPS Rules.

Stating the abrupt oral termination of petitioner to be in “complete defiance of the due process of law” the high court was of the view that just because management did not want the petitioner to continue in employment, the same could not be a reason for denying reinstatement.

The allegation of forgery and fabrication against the petitioner was doubted by the Bombay High Court, as no steps were taken by the trust authorities to punish him for the acts that they alleged him to have committed.

Story continues below this ad

The court also did not agree with the compensation of six months’ salary awarded by the school tribunal, as the same, according to the court, was not adequate considering the petitioner’s unblemished service of ten years.

The Bombay High Court, while observing it to be a “clear case of high-handedness and arbitrariness” as exercised by the trust, set aside the termination of the petitioner and directed him to be reinstated

Considering the suffering of the petitioner who had remained unemployed without his fault, the court directed that “full backwages shall be paid to the petitioner along with interest at the rate of 9% per annum” within a period of 2 weeks from the date of the judgment.

‘Orally terminated’

In September 2009, the petitioner was appointed as a librarian at NES High School and Junior College, managed by the Nimsakhar Society Trust.

The state granted sanction for the said appointment by order dated July 13, 2011; the petitioner continued to work as a librarian in said college until October 2014.

The college, however, due to declining student enrollment, was shut down by the trust.

On November 30, 2014, the trust transferred the petitioner to another educational institution managed by the trust, being NES High School.

The petitioner was permanently appointed to the post of junior clerk therein. On July 22, 2019, the services of the petitioner were orally terminated, and one Charansingh Laxman Ranaware was appointed.

On October 9, 2019, the petitioner filed a statutory appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (MEPS Act) before the School Tribunal, Pune.

The petitioner, on March 22, 2022, filed his affidavit of no employment claiming full salary from July 22, 2019, to the date of reinstatement by the trust authorities.

The trust authorities on March 31, 2022, filed an application for amendment of the written statement, and subsequently, the petitioner filed written notes of argument.

By judgment dated September 23, 2022, the school tribunal dismissed the appeal.

‘Illegal termination’

Advocate Rahul Kadam, appearing for the petitioner, argued that the judgment passed by the school tribunal was passed without due consideration of facts and material on record and therefore should be set aside.

Story continues below this ad

It was urged that the petitioner discharged his duties without any “embellishment or infractions,” and no adverse remarks or written complaints were made against him.

As per the counsel, after the college was closed, on November 24, 2014, the trust authorities transferred the petitioner to NES High School, where he was absorbed as a permanent employee to the vacant post of junior clerk with effect as per MEPS Rules.

It was submitted that on July 22, 2019, when the petitioner reported for duty, he was orally informed not to sign the muster, and his services were instantly terminated, and he was not provided with any reasons for the same.

It is contended by the counsel that the petitioner was a permanent employee, and service was terminated without following the procedure laid down in the MEPS Rules, 1981, and such oral termination is illegal and bad in law.

Story continues below this ad

According to the counsel, the employee who replaced the petitioner on the post of junior clerk was at the behest of the president of the trust since he is his relative.

It was also argued that neither the trust nor its functionaries served a requisite termination notice to petitioner, and neither was any enquiry or hearing conducted and on the said ground itself the termination was illegal.

‘Never a permanent employee’

Advocate Rushikesh Barge appearing on behalf of the trust submitted that the plea was misconceived, untenable in law and deserves to be dismissed.

He further stated that the petitioner had approached this court with “unclean hands and suppressed material facts” as the college in question shut down in 2011, and not in 2014 as alleged by the petitioner, and he was laid off, hence the termination of his services as alleged by him was not possible, and further, he couldn’t receive any salary from the college from 2011 onwards.

Story continues below this ad

The counsel further produced the order dated July 13, 2011, which, as argued by him, clearly stated that the appointment to the post of librarian was temporary in nature and the education officer never gave approval for the petitioner’s appointment.

It was contended that the school tribunal had rightly held that the petitioner was never a permanent employee and he did not make out any case on merits to obtain relief of reinstatement along with back wages. Also, it was urged that since the petitioner was not a permanent employee, the MEPS Rules did not apply to him

The counsel contended that the absorption order to show the petitioner’s absorption from college to NES High School, relied upon by him, is a false and fabricated document which was prepared in connivance with the previous principal of the school.

It was further argued that no government circular for sanctioned posts or a new staffing pattern was prepared to absorb the petitioner in alternate employment; hence, the petitioner’s claim that a new post of junior clerk was created in 2014 is false.

Story continues below this ad

The counsel urged that the education society had no power to create posts since the same was strictly governed by government policy making and law; consequently, since no post of junior clerk was ever sanctioned in the high school, the principal of NES High School and Junior College did not have the authority to create vacant posts in the institution.