- (1.) This writ petition has been preferred by petitioner Vardhaman Public School, Ajmer Road, Jaipur though its Honorary Secretary, against judgment dated 12.11.1997 of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Tribunal, whereby Original Application No.54/1995 filed by Ganesh Bhadoria (respondent herein) against order of his removal from service of the petitioner institution dated 22.02.1995, was allowed and order of removal has been set aside with direction to petitioner institution to reinstate the respondent in service with all consequential benefits.
(2.) Petitioner institution is registered with the State Government and recognized in the meaning of Section 2(q) of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions Act, 1989 (for short, 'the Act of 1989'). It is an unaided institution. The respondent no.1 Ganesh Bhadoria was appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher with the petitioner institution on 30.06.1988. He filed an application on 07.09.1994 praying for proper pay and allowances in regular pay scale. The said application was withdrawn by the respondent on the assurance given by the Secretary of the petitioner institution. Thereafter the services of the respondent no.1 were terminated on 31.10.1994 without there being any reason. While terminating the services of the respondent no.1, his designation was mentioned as Office Assistant. As per the respondent no.1, he met the office bearer of the petitioner institution, who put a condition before the respondent that he could be taken back in job provided he agreed that his name may be removed from the attendance register of the Teachers and is entered in a separate register meant for other employees of the petitioner institution. Respondent no.1, under compulsion, agreed for the condition and therefore the name of the respondent was removed from the attendance register of the Teachers and entered in the register of other employees with effect from 13.11.1994. This was done with one more teacher Shri Bhagwan Singh. It was thereafter that suddenly by order dated 22.02.1995 services of respondent no.1 were terminated. The respondent no.1 personally met and also submitted representation to the Director, Primary and Secondary Education, Bikaner. When no decision was thereon, he filed appeal before the Tribunal, which was allowed. Hence, this writ petition on behalf of the petitioner institution.
(3.) Shri V.K. Sharma, learned counsel for the petitioner institution, argued that the Tribunal has erred in law in holding the provisions of Section 18 of the Act of 1989 were not followed by the petitioner institution. It is argued that Section 18 is not attracted to the case of termination simplicitor. The respondent no.1 was engaged only on ad-hoc/temporary basis and his services were discontinued. Full-fledged disciplinary enquiry was not envisaged in the case of this nature. The petitioner institution is not receiving grant-in-aid. The respondent no.1 was not working against aided post and thus neither Section 18 of the Act of 1989 nor Rule 39(2) of the Rajasthan Non-Government Educational Institutions (Recognition, Grant-in-Aid and Service Conditions) Rules, 1993, was applicable.;