JELES EDUCATION SOCIETY & ORS. versus RT. BHITALE

Citation: [2015] 11 S.C.R. 878 · Decided: 30-09-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: J.S. KHEHAR · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
B 
[2015) 11S.C.R.878 
JELES EDUCATION SOCIETY & ORS. 
v. 
RT. BHITALE 
Civil Appeal No. 4606 of 2006 
SEPTEMBER 30, 2015 
[JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR AND R. BANUMATHI, JJ.] 
c 
Maharashtra· Employees of Private Schools 
(Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977-s.9- Post of 
Trained Graduate Teacher - Respondent was appointed 
purely on temporary basis - He was terminated on expiry of 
period prescribed in the appointment letter - Respondent 
D challenged termination on the ground that his appointment 
was liable to be considered as permanent since the same 
was against the permanent vacancy created by the 
resignation of previous employee and also that he belonged 
to the reserved category for which the post had been 
E advertised and as such there was no justification whatsoever 
for not treating his appointment as permanent - School 
Tribunal accepted respondent's case -Appellant-society filed 
writ petition before the High Court~ By interim order, High 
Court required the appellant-society to engage respondent 
F on a year to year basis -After about 2 years of reinstatement 
in terms of interim order, respondent sought leave to contest 
elections which was declined - However, respondent 
contested the election and did not tender his resignation in 
terms of r.42(3) of 1981 Rules as was advised by appellant-
G society-Appellant-society again terminated the services of 
the respondent- Termination was upheld by School Tribunal 
- High Court set aside termination - On appeal, held: It is 
apparent that the respondent did not fulfill the desired 
H qualification for occupying the permanent vacancy as he did 
878 
JELES EDUCATION SOCIETY & ORS. v. R.T. 
879 
BHITALE 
not fulfill educational qualification of Sanskrit - Under A 
r.9(9)(a), candidates can only be appointed on temporary 
basis, or on a year to year basis, when none of the backward 
class candidates is found suitable - Accordingly, 
respondent was not eligible for filling up vacancy on a 
permanent basis - His appointment was in conformity with 
B 
r.9(9)(a) of the 1981 Rules-Thus, first order of termination 
of the respondent's services was not only in consonance 
with his appointment order but was also in conformity with 
the statutory rules - Secondly, respondent despite being 
asked, did not abide the requirements indicated in the C 
proviso to r.42(3) - Having abstained from duties without 
leave, it was open to the appellant-society to dispense with 
his services - Thus both the orders of termination were in 
consonance with law - Service law - Maharashtra Private 0 
School Employees (Condition of Service) Rules, 1981 -
r.9(9)(a). 
. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELD:. 1. The effort at the hands of the appellant-
E 
society, in the first instance, ought to have been to fill 
up the permanent vacancy created by previous 
employee who resigned, on permanent basis. This 
mandate clearly emerged from Section 5(1) of the 1977 
Act and Rule 9(9)(a) of the 1981 Rules. However, in case F 
a candidate from the backward class was not available, 
it was open to the appellant-society to fill up the post 
temporarily, on a year to year basis by a candidate who 
may not belong to the backward classes. It is apparent, 
that the respondent did not fulfill the desired G 
qualifications for occupying the permanent vacancy 
created on resignation of previous employee inasmuch 
as, he did not possess the educational qualification of 
Sanskrit. On account of his not possessing the 
qualification of Sanskrit, the respondent was clearly not H 
880 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 11 S.C.R. 
A eligible for filling up the vacancy <:reated by previous 
employee, on a permanent basis. [Paras 18, 19][893-h, 
894-A-B, E] 
2. The said vacancy could be filled up on a 
B temporary basis, by a candidate belonging to the 
backward class. Because, while filling up the vacancy if 
a suitable candidate was not available from the particular 
backward class (for which it was earmarked, in the 
present case Scheduled Caste), it was open to the 
C appellant-society to fill up the vacancy, out of the . 
candidates belonging to other ·backward classes. And 
if a suitable candidate belonging to the other backward 
classes was also not available, then the vacancy could 
be filled up temporarily, or on a year to year basis, by a 
D suitable candidate from the general/open category. But, 
how would the post be filled up if none of the candidates 
who had applied, is considered suitable, on acc

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.