LAXMINARAYAN BIHARILAL BEHRE Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, Laxminarayan Behre, was Principal of Bhartiya higher Secondary School, Panagar, on 1st October 1969 when the school was taken over by the State Government and merged with the Government Higher secondary School, Panagar. Previous to its taking over by the Government, the school was run by the Bhartiya Education Society, Panagar, which is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. After the school was taken over, the petitioner was appointed by the State Government as Principal in the Government Higher Secondary School, Niwas (Mandla ). Thereafter, by order passed on 12th March 1973, the petitioner was absorbed as Upper division Teacher on the ground that he did not possess the necessary educational qualification. The petitioner then filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing the order appointing him as Upper division Teacher and for issuing a writ of mandamus that the agreement between him and the Education Society under which he was serving as Principal should be enforced against the State Government, and that the service conditions mentioned in that agreement should not be disturbed.

(2.) THE petitioner's agreement with the Education Society is Annexure VI. It provides that the petitioner "shall not be removable from his post of Principal ship before he attains the age of sixty years except on grounds of gross misconduct or permanent physical or mental unfitness. " It is this agreement which the petitioner wants to enforce against the State Government.

(3.) IT is settled law that a contract for personal service cannot be assigned by one party without the consent of the other. Therefore, when there is a change of masters, the employees of the old master do not become the employees of the new master and the agreements between the employees and the old master are of no avail against the new master unless the Dew master agrees with the employees to continue them in service on the same terms and conditions. This legal position was recognised in Nokes v. Doncaster Amalgamated Collieries ltd. , ( (1940) 3 All er 549 (H L), p. 551.) where Viscount Simon, L. C, in his speech observed as follows :