BRAJESH KUMAR GUPTA AND PARAS RAM TIWARI Vs. CHAIRMAN, KENDRIYA VIDYALAYA SANGATHAN, MINISTRY OF HUMAN RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners in both the writ applications are aggrieved by the common order dated 24.1.2005 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi in O.A. Nos. 308/04 and 310/04 whereby the learned Tribunal while quashing the impugned order of their termination from the post of Principal has given liberty to the respondents to take action in accordance with law and procedure, if deemed appropriate. The petitioners have prayed for a direction to the learned Central Administrative Tribunal to decide their case on merit by holding that they are the direct recruits on the post of Principal in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan appointed by the respondents on substantive basis in accordance with all the prescribed procedure and rules and by holding written examination and interview on all India basis and were subsequently regularized on the said posts against the vacancy. The petitioners, admittedly, on their posting have been working as Principal in their respective schools. All the petitioners were appointed in the different Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (hereinafter to be referred to as K.V.S. for short) as P.G. teachers and their services were confirmed. The petitioners were posted in various schools of the K.V.S. throughout the country after their joining and they have been performing their duties sincerely without any blemish in the service career.

(2.) THE facts of the cases are almost identical. In the edition of the Employment News dated 2.8.1999, a notice was published by the K.V.S. inviting applications for filling up the vacancy to the post of Principals in K.V.S. from amongst the Central/State/Semi Government/Autonomous Body/C.B.S.E. affiliated +2 schools fulfilling the conditions given in the advertisement. The petitioners belonging to the same autonomous organization of K.V.S. and being posted as P.G. teachers (P.G.T.) in C.B.S.E. affiliated +2 schools and having all the eligibilities and essential qualifications, applied for the post of Principal. A written test was held and the petitioners appeared at the said examination. Having qualified in the said examination, the petitioners were called for interview. The petitioners appeared before the Interview Board and selected by the Selection Committee. Letters of appointment to the post of Principal in the K.V.S. on transfer/deputation basis were issued to them individually. The petitioners assumed their charges as principal in the respective schools. As per the terms and conditions, the said appointment was initially on deputation basis for a period of one year subject to subsequent extensions. After the lapse of one year, the period of deputation was extended for a further period of one year. The petitioners, thereafter, were confirmed on the post of Principal. Suddenly by order No. F7 -7/2002/K.V.s. (Esst. 1) dated 18.11.2004. the appointments of the petitioners as Principals were terminated and the petitioners were reverted to the last post held by them before their appointment to the post of Principal. The grievance of the petitioners is that they were duly appointed by following the due procedures prescribed by law and the Constitutional provision as also under the rules of the K.V.S. and there was no violation of any law, prescribed rule/procedure. Their further grievance is that before issuing the said order of termination, no reason whatsoever was conveyed to them and no notice to show cause was given to them. The petitioners complained that as many as 140 similarly situated teachers have been working on regular basis on the post of Principal after regularization of their services. According to the petitioners, the appointment to the post of Principal is made as per the Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalaya, Appendix III, Schedule 1, Clause 10 which prescribes recruitment rules and procedures for the post of Principal and according to which the post of Principal is to be filled up by promotion on the basis of merit -cum -seniority amongst the Vice Principals who have rendered minimum five years of service in K.V.S. of which at least three years should be in the grade of Vice Principal. The said rule is being followed for regular promotion. Another prescribed mode for appointment of the Principal as provided in the said Appendix - III, Schedule I, Clause 10 is that if suitable candidate is not available then the Commissioner may fill up the vacancy on deputation basis from amongst the employees of the Government of India/State Government/Autonomous organizations including K.V.S./C.B.S.E. affiliated +2 schools provided the candidate fulfils all the qualifications prescribed for direct recruitment. The petitioners having possessed all the eligibilities and educational qualifications and having experience of more than 15 -20 years as P.G. teachers were appointed as Principals by a Selection Committee after following all the prescribed procedures. There was thus no visible valid reason for terminating the petitionerss services as Principal and according to them, the impugned order is wholly arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal and without jurisdiction.

(3.) THE respondents contested the writ applications by filing a copious counter -affidavit. It has been contended, inter alia, that by impugned order of termination no rights of the petitioners have been infringed as their appointments were on deputation. In clear terms it was mentioned in the advertisement inviting applications for the appointment that the deputation shall be for a period of one year extendable from year to year up to a maximum period of five years and the same will be governed by the existing instructions of the Government of India relating to deputation. The K.V.S. had reserved the right to repatriate the deputationists at any time even before the completion of the deputation period without assigning any reason. It was made clear in the advertisement that the appointment on deputation basis will not confer any right on the candidate for permanent absorption in the K.V.S. It was contended that no right whatsoever was existed in the beginning and the same cannot be conferred later on contrary to the rules and the terms of the appointments. There is also no question of violating the principle of natural justice as the contract itself makes it clear that the petitioners have no right to be regularized. It has been further contended that the petitioners appointment as Principal was contrary to rules from the very beginning and such being the circumstances, alleged non - observance of principles of natural justice would not ipso facto render the order bad. It would be useless formalities to issue the show cause notice which would ultimately end up in the same result and as such absence of any show cause notice do not vitiate the termination order. Learned CAT while setting aside the order as given liberty to the respondents to take action, if deemed appropriate, only in accordance with law and procedure and there is no illegality in the impugned order of the learned Tribunal. It has been further stated that the Board of Governors (BOG for short) has decided that the Commissioner, K.V.S. can appoint the Principals on deputation basis only and Commissioner has no power to appoint the Principals on regular basis. The present Chairman found the action of the then Commissioner as violative of the rules and directed the present Commissioner to cancel the appointments. The Chairman, K.V.S. is a superior authority who has a definite role in running of the Kendriya Vidyalayas. The Chairman, K.V.S. does not discharge his functions in the capacity of the Union Minister for Human Resources Development but in the capacity of the Chairman of the K.V.S. It has been wrongly submitted by the petitioners that the decision has been taken by the Chairman, K.V.S. in the capacity of the Union Minister for Human Resources Development. It has been contended that the appointment of the petitioners as Principal is irregular/illegal for various reasons, such as :