S SOUNDARARAJAN Vs. DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL EDUCATION MADRAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner in W. P. No. 14894 of 1994 is the appellant in the writ appeal. His case in the writ petition is as follows:- He completed the Plus Two Examination as well as the diploma Course in Teacher Training and applied for the appointment as teacher in the third respondent School. He was duly selected and appointed as Secondary grade Teacher in the third respondent School, which is a recognised aided School. According to him, the third respondent/management had taken signatures in certain blank papers and utilised the same as a resignation letter. Consequently, after the Summer Vacation in June, 1991 he was prevented from entering the School as and from 4. 7. 1991 treating the same as a termination of service. THE appellant filed W. P. No. 9459 of 1991 and this Court directed him to file an appeal before the Competent Authority as per the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Act, 1973 (hereinafter called 'the Act' ). He filed an appeal on 21. 7. 1991 to the second respondent who is the prescribed appellate Authority. THE second respondent allowed the appeal, but without giving opportunity to the third respondent-Management. Consequently, W. P. No. 14623 of 1991 was filed by the third respondent/management and it was allowed and remanded back to the second respondent. On remand the second respondent gave notice to the third respondent/management and allowed the appeal directing the management to reinstate the appellant on or before 17. 8. 1992. As against the said direction, the third respondent had filed a civil suit, O. S. No. 690 of 1992 on the file of the District Judge, Tiruchirapalli , and it was rightly dismissed as not maintainable on 28. 3. 1994. In spite of all the above proceedings, the third respondent/management did not reinstate the appellant and consequently the appellant came up with the present writ petition seeking a direction to the third respondent to either reinstate him as secondary Grade Teacher or in the alternative to redeploy him in some other Government School by recalling the sanctioned post from the third respondent School and alloting the same to any other needy school.

(2.) THE third respondent filed a counter affidavit stating that the appellant had well and truly resigned his post and he was not terminated from service. THE other facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are not however, disputed. It was further contended that the case of the appellant would not fall within Section 23 of the Act and therefore, his appeal to the second respondent was incompetent. It was also contended that rule 17- A introduced by G. O. Ms. No. 586, dated 2. 4. 1981 regarding the validity of the resignation, should have been followed. Lastly, it was contended that the third respondent had preferred a revision petition before the Joint Director of Elementary Education and therefore, the order of the second respondent could not be enforced.

(3.) BEFORE determining that question, we consider the objection based on Rule 17-A of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private Schools (Regulation) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as % 'the Rules' )introduced by G. O. Ms. No. 586, dated 2. 4. 1981. Rule 17-A of the Rules has been inserted with an object of putting an end to the malpractices adopted by the educational agencies in forcing the teachers to resign or obtaining undated or pre-dated resignations even at the time of appointment. Therefore, sub-rule (1)of Rule 17-A specifically provides that whenever resignation of appointment is tendered by a teacher or other person employed in a private school, he shall inform the District Educational Officer Inspector of Schools or the Deputy inspector of Schools concerned, the fact of his resignation in writing by registered post with acknowledgement due. Sub-rule (2) thereof further provides that he shall not give any undated or pre-dated resignation letter to a private school. Sub-rule (3) further provides that no educational agency shall insist or compel any teacher or other person employed in a private school to give at any time undated or pre-dated resignation letter. Sub-rules (4) to (6) lay down the further procedure to be followed in the event of receipt of the written information by the District Educational Officer, Inspector of Schools or Deputy inspector of Schools. Such a stringent procedure has been laid down only to eliminate the malpractice that was prevalent in the private schools relating to tendering of resignation and obtaining resignation letter from the teacher or any other person by the school agencies.