ABUL HUSSAIN BARBHUIYA Vs. STATE OF MIZORAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Victor L. Ralte, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. C. Zoramchhana, learned Addl. Advocate General, Mizoram appearing for the State/respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Also heard Mr. A.K. Rokhum, learned counsel for the respondent Nos. 5 and 6.

(2.) The case of the petitioner, in brief, is that he was appointed as Assistant Teacher in Radha Mohn High School, Kamalanagar, Mizoram, which was a venture school, by the respondent No. 5/ the Chairman, Managing Committee, vide appointment order, dated 12.02.2008. The petitioner joined his post on 12.02.2008. In the meantime, the school was upgraded to Ad hoc Grants-in-Aid School. Thereafter, on the recommendation of the Selection Committee/Screening Committee, the respondent No.5/the Managing Committee of the said school appointed the petitioner as Assistant Teacher by an order, dated 08.09.2008 for a period of 1 year and his appointment was approved by the respondent No. 4/the District Education Officer. Accordingly, the petitioner reported joining to the respondent No.5/the Chairman of the Managing Committee of the said school on 09.09.2008. The name of the petitioner, as appeared in the appointment order, was corrected by a Corrigendum, dated 18.11.2008, issued by the respondent No. 4. The petitioner was confirmed in the said post of Assistant Teacher and he was working in the said school continuously. Thereafter, the State respondents issued a Notification, dated 19.07.2013 and Corrigendum, dated 02.07.2014, whereby those teachers in the Government Primary School, Middle School and High School, having 8 years of service in the relevant Entry Grade were made eligible to enjoy the Senior Grade and those having 16 years of service were made eligible to enjoy the Selection Grade. The said notification was issued for those regular government employees and provided further that their services rendered in Ad hoc/Deficit/CSS continued by regularization would be counted as qualifying service. Pursuant thereto, the Managing Committee of the said school, with the approval of the respondent No. 3/the Director of School Education Department, Mizoram, by an Order, dated 28.11.2016, upgraded the respondent No. 6/the Head Master and teachers of Radha Mohn High School including the petitioner to the Senior Grade, on regular pay scale, on completion of 8 years of service. On 07.06.2019, with leave of the respondent No. 6/the Head Master of the school, the petitioner proceeded to Silchar to attend NRC hearing held on 10.06.2019, 11.06.2019 and 13.06.2019 at Silchar and attended the hearing. Thereafter, while the petitioner was planning to come back to his working place, he met with a motor vehicular accident on 15.06.2019 and sustained severe injuries in his mouth, requiring 10 stitches as one rod pierced through his left cheek. The petitioner duly informed the incident to the respondent No. 6 through whatsapp message. Unfortunately, he fell sick thereafter, as he suffered from typhoid from 30.06.2019 and he underwent medical treatment resulting in delay in resuming his school duty. However, on request from the school authority, he resumed duty on 09.07.2019. Subsequently, the vacation commenced w.e.f. 23.07.2019 to 02.08.2019. While he was enjoying the vacation period, on 31.07.2019, he was informed by his parents that they had received a letter, dated 01.07.2019, issued by the respondent No. 5/the Chairman, Managing Committee of his school, terminating his service with retrospective effect from 01.07.2019, on the ground of dereliction of duty. Pursuant thereto, he submitted a representation to the respondent No. 5 praying for revocation of the termination order giving retrospective effect without citing any speaking ground of his termination and without service of show cause notice before termination.

(3.) Mr. Victor L. Ralte, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submits that as per Rule 4 (xii) of the Government of Mizoram Education and Human Resources Development Department Ad hoc Recurring Grants-in-Aid for General Maintenance of Schools Rules, 1997 ('the Rules' for short) lays down that in case the service of any employee is found not suitable by the Managing Committee during the period of temporary appointments, his service may be terminated by the Committee after giving him one month's notice, with the approval of the Chairman of the Committee, which selected the incumbent. However, in the case of the petitioner, as no advance notice in terms of Rule 4 (xii) of the Rules was ever served before terminating him from service by the respondent No. 5, the aforesaid act apparently amounts to arbitrary being in violation of the principles of natural justice, because it deprived him of a fair opportunity of hearing and on that ground alone, the impugned order of his termination, dated 01.07.2019 is liable to be set aside and quashed.