Tuesday, 12, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

WPMS/2584/2025
2025 Latest Caselaw 4106 UK

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 4106 UK
Judgement Date : 8 September, 2025

Uttarakhand High Court

WPMS/2584/2025 on 8 September, 2025

Author: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
Bench: Manoj Kumar Tiwari
                                                                          2025:UHC:7921
             Office Notes,
                reports,
               orders or
             proceedings
SL.
      Date   or directions                   COURT'S OR JUDGE'S ORDERS
No.
                  and
              Registrar's
              order with
              Signatures
                             WPMS/2584/2025
                             Hon'ble Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.

Ms. Madhu Negi Samant, Advocate for the petitioner.

2. Mr. Devesh Ghildiyal, Brief Holder for the State of Uttarakhand / respondent nos. 1 to 3.

3. Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, Advocate for respondent no. 5.

4. This writ petition has been filed by Purkal Youth Development Society, Dehradun, which runs an educational institution. Petitioner is aggrieved by a communication dated 28.07.2025, issued by Sub Divisional Magistrate, Dehradun as Local Citizen Grievance Redressal Committee, Dehradun. By the said communication, Sub Divisional Magistrate has directed the Principal of the institution run by the petitioner to restore the position, which respondent no. 6 was enjoying earlier in the institution. The said communication is challenged by the petitioner on the ground that Sub Divisional Magistrate has no jurisdiction to issue such direction and against termination of service of a teacher in an unaided school, the remedy available is to approach the Education Tribunal constituted in terms of judgment rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case 2025:UHC:7921 of T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, (2002) 8 SCC 481.

5. Mr. Shashank Upadhyaya, learned counsel appearing for Central Board of Secondary Education submits that as per his instructions, the affiliation byelaws of CBSE were not followed while terminating the service of respondent no. 6 and no charge-sheet appears to have been issued to her. The termination order passed against respondent no. 6 is on record. The same was issued on 10.04.2025. The termination order is extracted below:-

"Ms. Kanchan Dhyani Date: April 10, 2025 Dehradun

Sub: Service Discontinuation with PYDS

Dear Ms. Kanchan This is with reference to the discussion around your proposed responsibilities, as well as the issues raised by you in this respect. Following our recent meeting on April 8, 2025, we have concerns regarding your lack of trust in the management of PYDS, and your unwillingness to teach assigned classes. Also, your conduct during the meeting was in violation of our Society's norms As a consequence of the above, we have reached a regretful decision that at this time we no longer have an option but to conclude your appointment with PYDS. In recognition of the long years of service put in by you, the Society will make you a payment equivalent to two months of your salary, less any advances taken by you. Upon satisfactory completion of your exit process, PYDS will also issue you a Letter of Experience in its normal format, confirming that you have served and exited in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Society.

With best wishes,

Anoop Seth Secretary"

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that whatever was payable to respondent no. 6, including two months' salary, has been paid to 2025:UHC:7921 her. She submits that since respondent no. 6 has already been terminated from service, therefore, the only remedy available to her is to approach the Education Tribunal and she approached a wrong forum and the SDM acted without jurisdiction while issuing the direction.

7. This Court finds substance in the submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner. The direction issued by SDM to the Principal of the concerned institution is outside the scope of his powers. On this short point alone, the writ petition is allowed. Impugned communication dated 28.07.2025, issued by Sub Divisional Magistrate is set aside. The respondent no. 6, however, shall be at liberty to approach the Education Tribunal/District Judge, Dehradun against termination of her service, if so advised.

(Manoj Kumar Tiwari, J.) 08.09.2025

Navin

NAVEEN DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, ou=HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND, 2.5.4.20=3be23325146e76a0642bdf4943fb90 46f487df006da82a131bb4e4403d3c0a15,

CHANDRA postalCode=263001, st=UTTARAKHAND, serialNumber=18167EEFB5CA8CFFD421A103 819DA875643AF56D653D095C6ED9A86DAAB 21CE5, cn=NAVEEN CHANDRA Date: 2025.09.09 09:51:50 +05'30'

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter