Disposed

Rupak kumar jain v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Allahabad HC8 Dec 2022WRIA/3407/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed the petitioner's writ petition challenging termination communications from a private school management. It held the petitioner was likely an employee of the PTA since the state school was not financially approved. Thus, service was private, barring writ jurisdiction.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of without granting relief as writ jurisdiction is barred for private service employment.

Rupak kumar jain Vs State of U.P through Secretary… — Service and Employment | Allahabad HC (2022)

¶1

Court No. - 36

¶2

Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3407 of 2022

¶3

Petitioner :- Rupak Kumar Jain Respondent :- State Of U.P Through Secretary Home And 3 Others

¶4

Counsel for Petitioner :- Eshita Sand Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.

¶5

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶6

Heard Ms. Eshita Sand learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the State respondents.

¶7

Present petition has been filed by the petitioner to challenge the communications dated 02.7.2014 and 23.7.2014 issued by the Committee of Managment, Jain Kanya Pathshala Inter College, Prempuri, Muzaffar Nagar. By those communications, petitioner has been directed not to sign the attendance register of regular employees working at that institution. Further, petitioner has been advised not to seek entry into the premises of the institution.

¶8

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit, aforesaid communications are in the nature of termination order. They have been passed without following the due procedure prescribed by law. Neither any disciplinary proceeding was initiated or ever concluded against the petitioner. While the petitioner has been working at the said institution since 24.7.2003, his services have been abruptly ended in violation of law. Reference has also been made to certain salary payments received by the petitioner. Relying on that, it has been submitted, the Committee of Management had earlier sought approval from the DIOS. It arose on deemed basis arising from the failure of the DIOS to pass any specific order on the recommendation made by the Committee of Management.

¶9

While such are the submissions advanced with great vehemence by learned counsel for the petitioner, at present it is difficult to grant any relief to the petitioner inasmuch as upon perusal of record, it transpires that the petitioner was an employee of Parent Teacher Association (in short 'PTA) formed at the institution in question. There is absolutely no evidence to reach the conclusion of grant of financial approval to the petitioner's appointment, at any stage. Merely because some salary payment may have arisen, absence of any order of financial approval may not have the effect of either grant of financial approval to the petitioner or of regularisation etc.

¶10

Consequently, it cannot be said with any conviction that any approval existed in favour of the petitioner's appointment at the above named institution. Therefore, the best status the petitioner may claim would be as an employee of the Committee of Management alone. Salary payment to such an employee ought to have been made from the own funds of the Committee of Management.

¶11

In that status, the communications, even if read as orders of termination passed by the Committee of Management, would fall outside the scope of writ jurisdiction being a contract of private service. Common law remedies would remain available to the petitioner to the exclusion of writ jurisdiction.

¶12

With the above, observation, writ petition is disposed of .

¶13

However, the present order may not stand in the way of the petitioner in applying afresh against any vacancy that may have arisen or may arise in future at the above institution.

¶14

Order Date :- 8.12.2022 Faraz

¶15

Digitally signed by FARAZ AHMAD Date: 2022.12.08 17:40:23 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Rupak kumar jain v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupak kumar jain v. State of U.P through Secretary Home and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mithilesh Kumar Srivastava Vs State of U.P. and 7 Others

Udaivir Singh Vs State of U P and 3 Others

Ram Chandra Maurya Vs State of U.P. and 2 Others

Akhilesh Kumar Singh Vs Directorate of School Education and 4 Others

Gaurav Sharma Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Shyam Narayan Pandey Vs State of U P and 5 Others