LexGOVERNING BODY, ST. ANTHONY'S COLLEGE, SHILLONG & ORS. versus REV. FR. PAUL PETTA OF SHILLONG EAST KHASI HILLS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
GOVERNING BODY, ST. ANTHONY'S COLLEGE, SHILLONG & ORS. v. REV. FR. PAUL PETTA OF SHILLONG EAST KHASI HILLS. AUGUST 18, 1988 [M.P. THAKKAR AND B.C. RAY, JJ.] St. Anthony's College-Whether Salesian Provincial/President of the Governing Body of the College could order transfer of the Principal A B of the College or whether the governing Body could pass such an order C of transfer-Whether an opportunity of hearing was to be given to the Principal to show cause against the proposed transfer. The respondent had. been appointed Principal of St. Anthony's CoUege by Salesian Provincial and his appointment had been approved by the )}irector of Public Instruction (D.P.I.) on the recommendation of D tlje,,governiitg body of the CoUege. Due to differences between the Princi- iraf and the Church authorities, and particularly, the appellants Nos 2, 3 and 4, i.e. the President and the members of the governing body of the CoUege, the appeUant No. 2, the President of the governing body and the Salesian Provincial intimated to the respondent of his transfer from the post of Principal of the College. The respondent contended that the E appellant No .. 2 had no authority to appoint or dismiss or transfer the Principal, as the Principal of the College belonging to minorities was to be selected by the governing body and to be approved by the D.P.J. in accordance with the government instructions contained in its Memo dated December 7, 1979. But the Salesian Provincial proposed another person as Principal, to which the governing body agreed and his F appointment was approved by the D.P:i. The respondent filed·a writ · petition in the High Court, contending tltat the ·siilesian Provincial had no power- to transfer him, as he had been appointed Principal by the governing body of the College with the approval of the D.P.I., and. so the Governing Body with the approval of the D.P.I. could transfer him under the statutory rules. and that the order of transfer, having been G passed without giving him any opportunity to show cause, was arbitrary, illegal and ma/a fide and violative of the principle of natural justice. The High Court held that there was no reason why the respon- dent's removal from the post of Principal should not have been by the governing Body and subject to the approval of the D.P.I., and directed inter alia that the impugned order of transfer be kept lD abeyance and H 507 508 SUPREME COURT REPORTS 11988] Supp. 2 S.C.R. A that the governing body would give the respondent an opportunity to show cause why he should not be transferred as stated in the impugned transfer order, and decide the matter of transfer after hearing him. Aggrieved by the order of the High Court, the governing body and others moved this Court by special leave. . .. B . ·It was contended by the appeilants inter .alia. that ihe respondent could not have any grievance against the order of transfer as he had no statutory right to remain as Principal and that he, being ordained as priest according to the Articles of the constitution of the Society of St. Francis de Sales, the Salesian Provincial could transfer him to serve in any of the institutions of the Society as his service was transferable, and C he could not question the transfer. Dismissing the appeal, the Court, HELD: The St. Anthony's College was a minority institution within the meaning of Article 30 of the Constitution, and the instruc- D lions contained in the Government Memo dated 7th December, 1979, laying down the procedure of appointment of Principal, vice-Principal, etc, in religious minority Colleges in the State would apply to this Institution. [514E-F) The impugned order of transfer was passed without asking the E respondent to show cause against the transfer and giving him an opportunity of hearing. The impugned order purported to transfer the respondent from the post of Principal of the College to the post of Teacher in a school. Tl!is order of transfer prejudicially affected the stat~s of the respondent. [515E-FJ J1 The main question for consideration was whether the Salesian Provincial, appellant No. 2 was competent to transfer the respondent who had been appointed by the governi.ng body of the college and approved by the D.P.I. as per the Government instructions applicable to a minority college. [515G] \ G According to the Government instructions aforesaid, the Princi- pal whose appointment had been approve
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.