L. DORENDRA SINGH Vs. MANIPUR PUBLIC SCHOOL SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 12.11.2003 passed in W.P.(C) No.1033 of 1999.

(2.) THE appellant initially joined as a Post Graduate Teacher in the year 1973 in Sainik School at Imphal. The respondent no.1 issued an advertisement on 25.10.1994 for filling up the post of Principal of Manipur Public School. In response to the said advertisement, the appellant submitted his application. The Academic Committee conducted an interview and recommended the appellant for such appointment. Accordingly on the basis of such recommendation, the appellant was appointed as Principal of Manipur Public School and was placed on probation for a period of 2(two) years vide order dated 20.06.1996. Thereafter by two subsequent orders dated 1.8.1998 and 23.12.1998, the period of probation was extended up to 23rd April, 1999. No further extension of probation was directed and the service of the appellant was terminated vide order dated 17.04.1999. The appellant filed review on 15.5.1999 against the order of termination. The General Body of the Society considered the review and rejected the same. Challenging the order of termination as well as the order passed on the application filed for review, the appellant filed the writ application.

(3.) THE learned Single Judge held that considering the constitution of the Society, the finance given by the State as well the land provided by the State and it's pervasive control, it cannot be said that the respondent no.1 is not a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution and accordingly held the writ application to be maintainable. 4.1. So far as the merit of the case is concerned, the learned Single Judge held that during the probation period the performance of the appellant was not found to be satisfactory and accordingly his service was terminated. It was further found that since the order of termination was a termination simpliciter considering the poor performance of the appellant during probation period, there was no requirement to initiate any proceeding against the appellant before termination and therefore Article 311 of the Constitution does not apply the case of the appellant. The writ application was accordingly dismissed.