BARANDA KALABHAI KAVAJI Vs. PRANTJI KELVANI MANDAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned advocates.

(2.) THE appellant, a primary school teacher, has preferred the present Appeal under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent against the judgment and order dated 5th December, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge in above Special Civil Application No. 23303 of 2007.

(3.) THE respondent No. 1 is the Prantij Kelvani Mandal, an educational trust, [hereinafter referred to as "the trust"]. The respondent No. 2 is the school run and managed by the trust. The respondent No. 3 is the District Primary Education Officer [hereinafter referred to as "the Education Officer"]. On 5th March, 1987 (Page 137 of the record) the trust gave public notice inviting applications from the scheduled tribe persons possessing SSC, PTC qualification for immediate appointment in the respondent No. 2 school. On 12th March, 1987 (Page 138 of the record), the Education Officer issued no objection certificate for appointment of two primary school teachers, one scheduled tribe and one unreserved category, possessing SSC, PTC qualification. Pursuant to the said advertisement, interviews were held on 31st March, 1987. On 31st March, 1987, the headmaster of the respondent No. 2 school sought approval for appointment of three selected candidates including one Baranda K. K. , a scheduled tribe candidate. On the same day, the appellant Baranda Kalabhai Kavaji was appointed as primary school teacher in respondent No. 2 school. Pursuant to the said appointment order, the appellant reported for duty on 1st April, 1987. The said appointment was temporary and on probation. The approval for appointment of the selected candidates was accorded by the Education Officer on 26th June, 1987 (Page 142 of the record ). It is undisputed that the appellant did not possess the required qualification of SSC, PTC. He possessed the qualification of SSC, TCWCG (Tailoring Course in Women and Children Garments ). Since his appointment, in the year 1993 an inspection was carried out by the Education Officer. Upon such inspection, it was found that the petitioner was qualified as a special subject teacher (tailoring ). The total number of special subject teachers in the respondent No. 2 school had exceeded the specified quota of 15% of total number of teachers. For that reason the appointment of the petitioner as a primary school teacher was not approved by the Education Officer for the purpose of grant. In absence of the approval by the Education Officer, by order dated 2nd August, 1993 made by the trust, the appellant's service was terminated effective from 2nd September, 1993 after office hours.