MANDIPANDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Through the instant petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution the prayer made by the petitioner is for quashing resolution dated 19.10.2007 (Annexure P.12) vide which Municipal Council (Nagar Panchayat) Machhiwara, respondent No. 2 (for brevity 'the Municipal Council') has taken a decision to terminate the services of the petitioner with immediate effect. A further prayer made is for issuance of direction to the respondents to allow her to continue to work on the post of ETT Teacher and to release her salary w.e.f. 29.12.2006 which is the date of her appointment.

(2.) Brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 3 issued an advertisement (Annexure P.5) inviting applications for filling up 7 posts of ETT Teachers for Primary Schools situated at Machhiwara. The educational qualifications prescribed were that a candidate should have passed 10+2 and Elementary Teacher Training Course (for brevity 'ETT'). If the 10+2 and ETT candidates were not available then the candidates having B.A./B.Sc./B.Com and B.Ed. Degree were to be considered. It was further required that the candidate must have passed Punjabi upto matric level and preference was to be given to the candidates who were living within the municipal limits of respondent No. 2 and if no candidate was found eligible, then the preference was to be given to the candidates firstly from the sub division and thereafter residents of district. The petitioner who belongs to Scheduled caste category and was fully eligible and qualified in terms of advertisement (Annexure P.5) applied for the post. She also submitted her Punjab resident/domicile certificate(Annexure P.6). After scrutinizing the applications, the name of the petitioner was considered under the scheduled caste category and her name figured at serial No. 2 in the merit list of the said category. She was accordingly issued appointment letter on 29.12.2006 for the post of ETT Teacher at Government Primary School No. 1 Machhiwara on temporary/provisional basis and also the posting order (Annexures P.7 and P.8). The petitioner immediately joined her duties and continued to work but she was not paid salary. The petitioner on various occasions requested the respondents to release her salary. When no response was received, she filed a representation on 17.9.2007 (Annexure P.9). The respondents on 24.9.2007, (Annexure P.10) served a show cause notice on the petitioner wherein it was stated that on an anonymous complaint having been received against the petitioner it was found that degree of Shiksha Visharad is not equivalent to B.Ed. Degree of Punjab University and that she was not the domicile of Machhiwara. By the said notice, she was informed that there was a proposal to terminate her services and she may give clarification in writing within 21 days. In the show cause notice the following discrepancies were pointed out :

(3.) On 4.10.2007 (Annexure P.11), the petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice. Alongwith the reply, she annexed documentary proof to prove that as the Hindi Sahitya Samelen Allahabad is a statutory body created by virtue of Hindi Sahitya Samelen Act 1972 and, therefore, it cannot be said that the said institution was not recognised one as the same was statutory in nature. The petitioner also highlighted that as per letter dated 17.2.2004 issued by the Government of India the degrees conferred upon by the said institute was considered to be recognised for the purpose of employment throughout the country. The petitioner also highlighted that the degree of Shiksha Visharad is also recognised degree under the UGC Act and the said institution from where the petitioner obtained degree has been held to be a deemed university. The petitioner also relied upon instructions dated 23.5.1988 issued by the Central Board of Secondary Education showing that the degree of Shiksha Visharad was recognised as equivalent to B.Ed. which fact has also been certified by the Hindi Sahitya Samelan Allahabad to the respondents vide their letter dated 1.10.2007 issued in response to a specific query raised by the respondents on 19.9.2007. After considering the reply the impugned resolution dated 19.10.2007 (Annexure P.12) was passed by the respondents terminating the services of the petitioner. Hence, this petition.