Punjab-Haryana High Court
Urmila Devi vs State Of Haryana And Others on 21 November, 2022
CWP No.24949-2017 (O&M) -1-
------------
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
217 CWP-24949-2017 (O&M)
Date of decision : 21.11.2022
Urmila Devi
... Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana and others
.. Respondents
CORAM :HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL
Present:- Mr. Sourabh Goel, Advocate for the petitioner(s).
Mr. Narender Singh Behgal, AAG, Haryana.
Mr. Jitender Nara, Advocate for respondents No.4 to 7.
***
Anupinder Singh Grewal, J. (Oral)
The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 17.08.2017
(Annexure P-7) whereby a direction has been issued by respondent
No.2/Director Secondary Education, Haryana to the Management for
termination of the services of the petitioner. She has also challenged the show
cause notice dated 21.08.2017 (Annexure P-6) issued by the Management
before dispensing her services.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not
only challenging the action of the Management but also the action of the State
Government for directing the Management to terminate her services holding
that the the appointment of the petitioner is illegal. He, therefore, submits that
she did not approach the Educational Tribunal and had instead approached this
Hon'ble Court as the action of the respondents is in flagrant violation of
1 of 4
------------
principles of natural justice.
Learned counsel for the respondents submits that as the petition
has arisen out of a dispute between an employee and the management, it would
be adjudicated by the Educational Tribunal in terms of the notification
No.24/21-2011-C-IV (3) dated 02.03.2015 issued by the Higher Education
Department, Government of Haryana. He also submits that in pursuance to an
interim order passed by this Court on 02.11.2017, the petitioner is continuing
in service.
Heard.
The State Government has vide Notification No.24/21-2011-C-IV
(3) dated 02.03.2015 issued by the Higher Education Department, Government
of Haryana constituted the Educational Tribunal. The notification is reproduced
hereunder:-
"In pursuance to the judgment dated 20.10.2002 of the Hon'ble
Supreme Court of India in TMA Pai Foundation and others
versus State of Karnataka, 2003 (2) SCT 385: 2002(8) SCC 481
wherein the Hon'ble Court has observed that for the redressal of
grievances of employes of aided/unaided educational institutions
who are subjected to punishment or termination of services, a
mechanism will have to be evolved by constituting appropriate
tribunals. The right of filing appeals would lime before the
District and Session Judges or Additional District and Session
Judges till the tribunals are set up.
It is notified that the District and Session Judges in the State of
Haryana have been authorized to heard the appeals of the
employees or aided/unaided educational institutions against
decision of management within their jurisdiction, by the Hon'ble
Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh vide No.23414
Gaz.II/IX.C.II dated 10.08.2005. The tribunals already notified by
2 of 4
------------
the Hon'ble High Court will also bear appeals of employees of
aided/unaided colleges against the orders of management."
The petitioner was appointed as a Teacher with respondent No.5
(School) in the year 1995. The proceedings had been initiated by the
Management for dispensing with the services of the petitioner on 21.08.2017.
In pursuance thereto, the Director, Higher Education (Respondent No.2) had
also written to the District Education Officer, with a copy to the
School/Management to issue show cause notice to the petitioner. The petitioner
had been an employee of the School for 22 years before the dispute between
her and the Management arose. The action of the Management and the
functionaries of the State Government thereafter is an off-shoot of a dispute
between an employee and the Management.
It has been held by the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case
of Dr. Mukul Gupta versus Industrial Finance Corporation of India
Limited and others, 2015(4) SCT 380 that all the disputes of employees
pertaining to their punishment or termination of services with the Management
of aided or un-aided educational institutions within the jurisdiction of the State
of Haryana would be determined by the Educational Tribunal, Haryana in the
first place.
It is true that this Court, while exercising writ jurisdiction, could
entertain a petition wherein there is violation of principles of natural justice
and an alternative remedy available to the petitioner would not be in the facts
and circumstances be an efficacious one. However, I do not find any
exceptional circumstances in the instant case which would warrant adjudication
by this Court when the petitioner has not availed the alternative remedy of
3 of 4
------------
approaching the Educational Tribunal for the redressal of her grievance.
Consequently, the petition is disposed of by relegating the
petitioner to the remedy of approaching the Educational Tribunal, Haryana for
redressal of her grievance in terms of the aforenoted notification.
The petition along with miscellaneous application(s), if any, stands
transferred to the Educational Tribunal and the parties shall appear before the
Educational Tribunal, Haryana, on 01.12.2022.
Interim order passed by this Court on 02.11.2017 will continue till
01.12.2022 and the petitioner would be at liberty to file an application before
the Tribunal for interim directions.
(ANUPINDER SINGH GREWAL)
JUDGE
November 21, 2022
sonia gugnani
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether Reportable : Yes/No
4 of 4
