KHIROD KUMAR MOHANTY Vs. STATE EDUCATION TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition is directed against the judgment of the State Education Tribunal constituted under Section 24 -A of the Orissa Education Act, 1969 (in short, the 'Act').

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, the facts are as follows : - The opposite party No. 8 here in was appointed as Hindi teacher in the School, i.e., Adapal High School in the District of Mayurbhanj in the year 1982. Subsequently, the Secretary of the School did not allow him to sign the attendance register and also prevented him to work in the school from the month of April, 1992. The present petitioner was appointed in his place on 18.4.1992. Being aggrieved with the termination order opp. party No. 8 here in filed an appeal before the Tribunal under Section 24 -A of the Act. The operative portion of the order of the Tribunal is as follows : 'Hence' ordered : - - The appeal is allowed on contest. The impugned order of termination dt. 10.5.91 is hereby quashed. The appellant be re -instated in the service forthwith. But this order would not stand as a bar to terminate his service if he fails to acquire the requisite qualification as fixed by the Government, to hold the post of the Hindi teacher in High School within. the reasonable time that would be fixed by the Managing Committee, after compliance of Section 10 -A of the O.E. Act of 1969. In case of reinstatement of the appellant if respondent No. 7 would loose his job he be reinstated in any of the Schools within the control of Inspector of Schools, Mayurbhanj Circle. Parties to bear their respective costs.'

(3.) THERE is no dispute that after put in up l0 years of service the services of opp party No. 8 were terminated in complete violation, of the principle of natural justice. That was the finding arrived at by the Tribunal. This is one of the grounds for which the termination order was set aside. The second ground on which the termination order of opp party No. 8 herein was set aside was non -observation of Section 10 -A of the. Act which runs as follows : '10 -A. Service of teachers of aided institution not to be terminated without approval : (1) - - - -The services of a teacher (and other members of the staff) of an aided educational institution shall not be terminate without obtaining the prior approval in writing, of the; (a) (Director)in the case of the teacher (and other members of the staff) of school. (b) Circle inspector of school having jurisdiction, in the case of teacher(and other members of the staff) (2) Every order passed by Director Circle Inspector, as the case may be either according to approval or refusing to accord approval under Sub section (1) shall communicated to the parties concerned within three month of the reference. (3) Any person aggrived by an order passed under Sub -section (1) may prefer an appeal to the Tribunal within one month from the date of receipt of the order. We also like to refer to Clause (b) of Section 3 of the Act which defines as follows : 'aided educational institution means private educational institution which is recognised by a from the State Government and includes an educational institution covered by the list of educational institution eligible to receive aid as may be drawn by the state Government from time to time under the Scheme regulating Government grant -in -aid to educational institutions for payment of teachers salaries;'