SARDAR SHAFIQUE AHMED Vs. CITIZEN WELFARE EDUCATION SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition impugns the Judgement and order dated 13-8-1996 rendered by the School Tribunal at Nashik dismissing Appeal No. 40/1994 and thereby turning down the petitioner s challenge to the order of termination dated 3-9-1994 and consequently dismissing his plea for reinstatement under the Respondent No.4 i.e. Sardar High School and Engineering College, Islamnagar, Malegaon.

(2.) The Petitioner at the relevant time held the qualifications of B.Com. B.P.Ed. and M.P.Ed. and as per him the Respondent No.1 Society had released an advertisement, invited applications for two posts of Assistant Teachers with qualifications of B.Sc., B.Ed/B.P.Ed. and B.A., B.Ed./B.P.Ed. and this requirement was published in the local newspaper by name Citizen Times on 15-7-1991. In response to the said advertisement the petitioner claims to have submitted an application, he underwent the selection process and was issued an appointment order dated 12-6-1991. The said appointment was on probation for a period of two years and it was effective from 14-6-1991 in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-40-2600. As per the petitioner he was surprised to receive another appointment order dated 10-7-1993 in the very same pay scale and again on probation for a period of two years and at the end of the academic year 1993-94 he was issued with a notice that his appointment would come to an end on 30-4-1994. He, therefore, approached the School Tribunal and filed Appeal No. 40/1994 in the month of September 2004. As per the petitioner he had worked for three consecutive academic years i.e. 1991-92, 1992-93 and 1993-94 and his initial appointment having been made on probation, he had become a permanent teacher at the end of the academic year 1992-93 and hence the notice informing that his tenure would come to an end on 30-4-1994 was illegal. He, therefore, prayed for reinstatement with backwages and consequential benefits in his Appeal before the School Tribunal.

(3.) The Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 appeared before the School Tribunal and opposed the application by filing a written-statement. Before the written-statement was filed, by an exparte interim order dated 30-9-1994 the stay to the notice of termination was granted. The petitioner alleged that the said ad-interim order was not implemented by the management and, therefore, he had filed Contempt Petition No. 30/1994 before the School Tribunal. Even after filing of the Contempt Petition, the petitioner was not reinstated. In the written statement filed by the management it was alleged that the appointment letter dated 12-6-1991 was false and fabricated and in any case the Respondent No.4 Head Master did not have authority to issue an appointment order for the post of Assistant Teacher. The management also denied to have released the advertisement published in Citizen Times on 15-7-1991 and it contended that the rival group in the management had released the same advertisement mischievously. However,the management admitted that in the next academic year 1992-93 the petitioner was engaged but as a part time Assistant Teacher in Physical Education/English and he was paid remuneration of Rs.700/- per month. The management also denied to have issued the subsequent appointment order dated 10-7-1993 and if there was any such appointment order issued by the Head Master as claimed by the petitioner, the Head Master did not have any such authority. The appellant was not in service in the academic year 1993-94 and he has not signed on muster-rolls as well. The management, therefore, stated that at no point of time the appellant was appointed as a full time teacher on probation and his tenure came to an end by efflux of time. Consequently, there was no cause of action to file an Appeal under Section 9 of the MEPS Act, 1977 (the Act for short).