MARY KUTTY MICHEL Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that she submitted a resignation letter before the respondent No.4, but as the school was already taken over by the State Government, the resignation of the petitioner was not to be accepted by the Society. THE petitioner made a prayer for withdrawal of the resignation, but it was not allowed alleging that the same has already been accepted by the President of the Society, running the school and the petitioner was not permitted to work in the school thereafter. Though for some period, she was allowed to continue, but no action was taken for absorption of services of the petitioner in the Government service and thereby the rights of the petitioner have been denied. It is contended that in fact wrong information was sent with respect to making of resignation by the petitioner, by the Principal of the school and on account of this reason only the claim of the petitioner for absorption in Government service was not considered. It is contended that because of such illegalities committed by the respondents, the petitioner has been denied her valuable rights, therefore, she is required to approach this Court by way of filing this writ petition.

(2.) BRIEF facts giving rise to filing of this writ petition are that the petitioner was said to be appointed by one Shriram Shiksha Samiti Gangahra, Rewa, vide order dated 1.7.1977 for the purposes of her posting as Lecturer in Science in the school run by the said Samiti known as Anjan Higher Secondary School, Gangahra, Rewa. The said school was subsequently started receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government. The post of the petitioner as a teacher was approved by the education authorities for the purposes of distributing the salary from the grant-in-aid. Later on, a decision was taken by the State Government on the basis of a resolution passed by the Cabinet of Ministers to take over all such schools and, accordingly, the aforesaid Anjan Higher Secondary School, Gangahra, was also taken over by the State Government. Certain posts were sanctioned vide order dated 6.11.2000. The petitioner was in the service at that time. However, before even absorption, the petitioner made an application on 30.4.2002 submitting that her husband was posted at Gajva Gear Factory, Dewas. The petitioner was not keeping good health and was not in a position to serve in the school, therefore, she was tendering her resignation. After making such an application, the petitioner again made an application on 26.7.2002 saying that the petitioner on account of certain personal problems has tendered the resignation, but the same was not accepted, therefore, she may be allowed to withdraw the same and the period of absence of the petitioner may be adjusted in leave. The petitioner gave her joining in the school which was accepted by the authorities. However, the proceedings of absorption of the employees of the school were concluded on 13.1.2005 and, ultimately, it was informed that the claim of petitioner for absorption was not considered only because it was informed by the Principal of the School that the petitioner has submitted her resignation on 30.4.2002. Because of such a reason, the claim of the petitioner was not considered despite making representation, therefore, she was required to approach this Court.

(3.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.