Management of Cathedral Composite Pu College and High School Vs Mr Durga Prasad

THIS WP FILED PRAYING TO-QUASH THE ORDER DTD 04.08.2022 PASSED IN MA(EAT) NO.14/2020 BY THE 17TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-16) VIDE ANNEXURE-A AND GRANT AN INTERIM ORDER TO STAY THE OPERATION OF THE ORDER DTD 04.08.2022 PASSED IN MA(EAT) NO.14/2020 BY THE 17TH ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE, BENGALURU (CCH-16) VIDE ANNEXURE-A.

¶30

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

¶31

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶32

HC-KAR

¶33

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK S.KINAGI

¶34

ORAL ORDER

¶35

This writ petition is filed by the petitioners

¶36

challenging the order dated 04.08.2022 passed in M.A. (EAT) No.14/2020) by the 17^th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru (CCH-16) vide Annexure-A.

¶37

Brief facts leading rise to the filing of this writ petition are as follows:

¶38

The respondent was terminated from service as Hindi Teacher on 15.12.2019. The respondent aggrieved by the order of termination, filed an appeal in MA(EAT)No.14/2020 before the Educational Appellate Tribunal. During the pendency of the said appeal, the petitioners filed a memo stating that the respondent has raised the pure questions of law in the appeal. The respondent has contended that the action of the petitioners herein in terminating the respondent under Section 99 of the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (for short

¶39

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶40

HC-KAR

¶41

'the Act') is illegal and opposed to Section 98(1) of the Act. It is further contented that the petitioners and the respondent have not obtained prior sanction as required under Section 98(1) of the Act and no show cause notice nor enquiry was held. The said contentions are pure questions of law. Without prejudice to the rights of the petitioners, the respondent request that the matter be heard, and disposed off. It is only a memo for matter to be heard. It is only a questions of law. The petitioners themselves have requested. The Appellate Tribunal after hearing the learned counsel for the parties, on the memo filed by the petitioners, has passed the impugned order and disposed of the appeal itself. The petitioners, aggrieved by the impugned order filed this writ petition.

¶42

The respondent filed the statement of

¶43

objections contending that the petitioners in their memo, sought to dispose of the appeal itself on the ground that the appeal contains the pure question of law. Further

¶44

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶45

HC-KAR

¶46

contended that the order of termination passed by the petitioners are in violation of principles of natural justice. The Tribunal considering the said fact, has passed the impugned order. Hence, on these grounds, prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶47

4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners

¶48

and also the learned counsel for the respondent.

¶49

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶50

the petitioners have filed a memo stating that in the appeal, only questions of law are involved and the matter may be heard and disposed off. Instead of passing an order on the memo filed by the petitioners, the Tribunal has passed an impugned order on merits disposing the appeal itself. He submits that the Tribunal has not heard the matter on merits. The petitioners are being deprived of from putting their contention before the Tribunal. He also submits that the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is

¶51

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶52

HC-KAR

¶53

in violation of the principles of natural justice. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to allow the writ petition by setting aside the order passed by the Tribunal and remit the matter to the Tribunal, with a direction to pass an appropriate order in accordance with law.

¶54

Per contra , learned counsel for the respondent

¶55

submits that the order of termination passed by the petitioners, is in violation of principles of natural justice. He submits that before passing an order of termination, no charge memo was issued, no inquiry was held and the Enquiry Officer was not appointed. The Tribunal considering the order passed by the petitioner is in violation of the principles of natural justice and rightly passed an impugned order. Hence, on these grounds, he prays to dismiss the writ petition.

¶56

Perused the records and considered the

¶57

submissions of the learned counsel for the parties.

¶58

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶59

HC-KAR

¶60

There is no dispute that the respondent was

¶61

working in the petitioner-Institution. The petitioners terminated the respondent from service without holding an enquiry. The petitioners aggrieved by the order of termination, preferred an appeal before the Educational Appellate Tribunal. The respondent led the evidence, when the matter was posted for petitioners' evidence, the petitioners filed a memo stating that the appeal filed by the respondent involves only a questions of law and not of facts. Hence, requested the Tribunal to dispose off the matter as per the said memo.

¶62

From the perusal of the order sheet, it discloses

¶63

that the Tribunal heard both the parties on the memo and not on the merits of the case. Thus, the Tribunal instead of passing an order on memo, has disposed off the main appeal on merits without providing an opportunity of hearing to both parties. Thus, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is in violation of the principles of natural

¶64

8 - NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶65

HC-KAR

¶66

justice. Hence, on this ground alone itself the impugned

¶67

order passed by the Tribunal is liable to be set aside.

¶68

In view of the above discussion, I proceed to pass the following:

¶69

ORDER

¶70

i. The writ petition is allowed .

¶71

ii. The impugned order dated 04.08.2022 passed in MA (EAT) No.14/2020 by the 17^th Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru vide Annexure-A is hereby set aside.

¶72

iii. The appeal is restored.

¶73

iv. The Educational Appellate Tribunal is

¶74

directed to hear the arguments on merit and pass an appropriate order in accordance with law within six months from

¶75

NC: 2025:KHC:44462 WP No. 22585 of 2022

¶76