Sowmiya Rajendrakumar
Published on: 25 August, 2022 at 20:14 IST
The Supreme Court has held that a writ petition raising service disputes against private educational institutions are not maintainable, if they are not governed or controlled by the statutory provisions.
“The actions or decisions taken solely within the confines of an ordinary contract of service, having no statutory force or backing, cannot be recognised as being amenable to challenge under Article 226 of the Constitution. In the absence of the service conditions being controlled or governed by statutory provisions, the matter would remain in the realm of an ordinary contract of service” the bench comprising Justices Aniruddha Bose and JB Pardiwala observed.
In this case, the Madhya Pradesh High Court (Division Bench) held that a writ petition filed by an employee of a private unaided minority educational institution seeking to challenge his termination from service is maintainable in law.
In appeal before the Apex Court, the educational institution raised the following issues:
(a) Whether a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is maintainable against a private unaided minority institution?
(b) Whether a service dispute in the private realm involving a private educational institution and its employee can be adjudicated in a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution? In other words, even if a body performing public duty is amenable to writ jurisdiction, are all its decisions subject judicial review or only those decisions which have public element therein can be judicially reviewed under the writ jurisdiction?
The court noted that the appellant- School is a private unaided minority educational institution, which enjoys the protection guaranteed under Article 30(1) of the Constitution and there is absolutely no Governmental control over the functioning and administration of the school. The school is presently affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) and is thus governed by its Rules and Byelaws, the court noted.
“CBSE itself is not a statutory body nor the regulations framed by it has any statutory force. Secondly, the mere fact that the Board grants recognition to the institutions on certain terms and conditions itself does not confer any enforceable right on any person as against the Committee of Management”, the court observed.
At the outset, the court noted that the CBSE is only a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and the school affiliated to it is not a creature of the statute and hence not a statutory body.