GIRIJA PANDEY Vs. SURYA EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner challenges the order of the School tribunal dated 18-12-1996. By this order, the School Tribunal has dismissed the appeal both on the grounds of limitation and on merits.

(2.) The case of the petitioner is that she was appointed as an Assistant teacher in the primary section of the school but no appointment order was issued to her. The petitioner claims that her services were terminated on 15-6-1992 orally by the respondents. An appeal was filed by her on 17-7-1992 contending that her services had been illegally terminated by the respondents. In her appeal, the petitioner had stated that she was appointed to the school on a clear permanent vacancy. She has stated that she was paid a salary of Rs. 300/- per month. According to the petitioner, she was suffering from jaundice from 14-12-1991. She had submitted medical certificates on 31-1-1992, 5-3-1992 by registered A. D. which were received by the management. A fitness certificate was submitted on 21-5-1992. When the petitioner reported for duty on 15-6-1992, she was handed over an experience certificate and was informed that she was no longer required in service. The appellant has tried to explain the delay caused in filing the appeal by stating that she had approached the Deputy director of Education in July, 1992, before filing the appeal. According to her, the delay in preferring the appeal was nominal and, therefore, the Tribunal ought to have condoned the delay.

(3.) In their written statement, the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 had contended that the petitioner was appointed as a teacher in the secondary section on a temporary basis. She was also required to work in the primary section whenever no teacher was available in that section. The respondents have also pleaded that the petitioner had abandoned her services on 14-12-1991 and in fact her experience certificate which was written out by her husband indicates that she had left the services of the respondents from 30-4-1992. The respondents have stated in their written statement that they called upon the petitioner by their letters dated 27-2-1992, 6-1-1992 and 27-1-1992 to report for work. These letters were sent under certificate of posting. According to the respondents, the petitioner continued to remain absent without intimating them the reason for her absence. The petitioner's services came to an end, according to the respondents, because she abandoned her services. The respondents have however admitted receiving the medical certificates dated 5-2-1992 and 29-1-1992 indicating that the petitioner was suffering from jaundice.