M RAJASUKUMAR Vs. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The writ petition has been filed for issuance of a writ of mandamus, forbearing the respondents from retiring the petitioner before the end of the academic year 2011-2012.

(2.) The writ petitioner M. Rajasukumar is a physics teacher working in the 5th respondent, school, namely, HVF English Medium Educational Society, Vijayanta Senior Secondary School at Avadi in Chennai-54. After completing his graduation in physics from the Sri Ramakrishna Mission Vidyalaya Arts College at Coimbatore, he has also acquired bachelor of Education at Government Training College at Kumarapalayam. With this qualification, he joined the service in the Vijayanta Matriculation School, 5th respondent herein, as a Primary Teacher in 1979. It is further stated that the Heavy Vehicles Factory is under the direct management of the Ordnance Factory Board at Calcutta. The Ordnance Factory Board manages several factories in Tamil Nadu, a cordite factory at Aravankadu, The Nilgiris and an ordnance Factory at Tiruchirappalli etc. The HVF was running schools for its employees working therein and the 5th respondent herein is one such institution. For several years, it was being run by the HVF and for achieving a better management and efficient administration, the 4th respondent Society was created on 2.3.1982. The 5th respondent institution in which the petitioner is working is affiliated to the 1st respondent, namely, the Central Board of Secondary Education, represented by its Secretary, having its main office in Delhi. As per the bye-laws framed by the 2nd respondent society, namely, the Director General of Ordnance Factory Board Calcutta, the members and office bearers of the society will have to follow the rules and regulations framed by the 1 st respondent. It is also stated that the 1 st respondent has got control over more than 897 Kendriya Vidyalayas, 1761 Government Schools, 5827 Independent Schools, 480 Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalayas and 14 Central Tibetean Schools which are also governed by its bye-laws. Though the headquarters of the 1 st respondent is in New Delhi, for the sake of better management and effective administration, the day-to-day administration of the 5th respondent school is given to the Regional Office which is situated at Chennai.

(3.) The grievance of the petitioner herein is that he has put in 30 years of experience in teaching in the respondent school without any blemished service records. While so, by calculating the petitioner's date of superannuation as on 31.7.2009, the respondents have indicated the petitioner for getting retirement on 31.7.2009 which falls in the middle of the academic year. The respondent institution is affiliated to the Central Board of Secondary Education. The Central Board of Secondary Education School is governed as per the bye-laws framed by it. Chapter VII relates to service rules for employees in an institution. Rule 24 enables each school affiliated with the Board to frame Service rules for its employees as per Education Act of the State/Union Territory. If the institution has not framed any rules, then service rules framed by the 1 st respondent will govern the institution. Therefore, since the respondent school has not framed any service rules, the rules framed by the Central Board of Secondary Education will be made applicable to the institution wherein the petitioner is employed. The relevant Rule 30 deals with retirement of each employee including the head of the institution which is extracted here under: 30. Retirement 1, "Not withstanding anything contained in these rules or otherwise every employee including Head of institution shall retire from service on attaining the age of 60. However, if the age of superannuation falls during the academic session, the concerned employee will retire at the end of the academic session. Provided further that, if such employee is a recipient of National/State/CBSE Teachers' Award, he may be considered for a further extension of service for two years after attaining the age of superannuation provided he is medically fit and is prepared to serve the school. The school managing committee after considering such case of extension of service, shall forward the details of the Board." In view of the above said Rule 30, when the petitioner is entitled to continue as a teacher till the end of the academic year 2011-2012, all of a sudden, the respondents indicated to the petitioner to retire on reaching superannuation on 31.7.2009. Immediately, the petitioner was constrained to give a representation dated 9.6.2009 to the respondents 4 and 5 by forwarding another copy through proper channel and the same was also acknowledged by the concerned authorities. In the said representation, the petitioner requested them to permit him to continue in the post till the end of the academic year, but the same remained unanswered. But, the respondents indicated in his salary for May, 2009 and June, 2009 that the petitioner must retire on 31.7.2009 which is totally contrary to the bye-law. Because as per the bye-law, the date of superannuation of the petitioner should be 31.5.2012 and not 31.7.2009. Further, as the representation of the petitioner is pending undisposed of till now, the petitioner was constrained to file this Writ Petition seeking to forbear the respondents from retiring the petitioner before the end of the academic year 2011-2012. Further, it is stated that the petitioner is medically fit and in a position to teach for a decade more.