RASHMIBEN C BODANI Vs. PRESIDENT ADARSH EDUCATION SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) .The petitioner who was earlier employed as an Assistant Teacher in the Primary School run by the respondent-Trust and whose services were terminated on 30th April, 1979, challenges the decision of the Primary Education Tribunal dated 25-2-1992, rejecting her application No. 5 of 1992 on the ground that the application was not maintainable before the Tribunal since her services were terminated prior to the coming into force of the provisions of Sec. 40E of the Bombay Primary Education Act. The provisions of Sec. 40E laying down that the disputes between the manager and teacher of the nature referred to therein will be decided by the Tribunal constituted under Sec. 40F of the Act were added by Act No. 22 of 1986, published in G.G.G. Part-IV E034-2 dated 13-9-1986. The Tribunal also held that since this was not a suit or proceeding which was transferred from any civil Court under Sec. 40G(2) of the said Act, it could not entertain the same.

(2.) . This matter has a chequered history. The petitioner had earlier resorted to the industrial forum, but her reference came to be rejected on 20-11-1985, on the ground that being a teacher she was not a workman. It appears that she lost even in a writ petition which was rejected on 27-11-1991 as per the decision at Annexure "C" to the petition. The High Court, following the decision of the Supreme Court in A. Sundarambal v. Government of Goa, Daman & Diu, reported in AIR 1989 SC 1700, held that a school teacher would not be a workman within the meaning of Sec. 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act. Therefore, she made an application before the Education Tribunal.

(3.) . Section 40E of the said Act which came to be inserted in the said Act along with other provisions of Chapter VIIA provides that where there is any dispute between the manager of a recognized private primary school and a teacher in service of such school, which is connected with the conditions of service of such teacher, the manager or, as the case may be, the teacher, may make an application to the Tribunal constituted under Sec. 40F for the decision of the dispute. Sec. 40F provides that there shall be constituted by the State Government by an order published in the official Gazette one or more Tribunals for the purpose of Chapter VIIA. Under sub-sec. (4) of Sec. 40F, it shall be the duty of the Tribunal : (i) to entertain and decide applications made to it raising disputes of the nature referred to in Sec. 40E, (ii) to deal with and decide all suits and proceedings transferred to it under sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 40G and (iii) to entertain and decide appeals made under sub-sec. (5) of Sec. 40B of the Act. The jurisdiction of civil Court was simultaneously barred by Sec.40G(1), which provided that no civil Court shall have jurisdiction to settle, decide or deal with any question which is, by or under Chapter VIIA, required to be settled, decided or dealt with by the Tribunal. As regards the pending matters in the civil Courts, sub-sec. (2) of Sec. 40G provided that all suits and proceedings between the manager of a recognized private primary school and a teacher in service, of such school relating to disputes connected with the conditions of services of such teacher, which are pending in any civil Court on the date of the commencement of the Bombay Primary Education (Gujarat Amendment) Ordinance, 1986, shall be transferred to and continued before the Tribunal. However, the execution proceedings and appeals arising out of the decrees or orders passed by such Courts before the commencement of the amendment Ordinance were required to be disposed of as if the amendment Act had not been passed.