1

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 10506-10510 OF 2011

THE CORRESPONDENT, SCHAFFTER HIGHER  SECONDARY SCHOOL, TIRUNELVELI AND ORS. ETC.  Appellant (s)

                               VERSUS A. M. SANKEY JOHN AND ANR. ETC.              Respondent(s)

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J. 1. The appellants are before this Court, aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 26.03.2010 passed by the Madurai Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.A.(MD) Nos. 253, 254, 375, 376 and 377 of 2009.  The Division Bench entered a finding that the termination of the private respondents was bad in law being  in  violation  of  the  principles  of  natural justice.

2. During  the  pendency  of  the  appeals  before  us, pursuant to our specific order dated 23.11.2017, the District Education Officer, Tirunelveli, has passed an order dated 04.12.2017 holding that the appointing authority was not competent to appoint the private respondents and hence, no approval can be granted in the case of those appointments.  Though, no separate orders are passed in the case of the two remaining

2

private  respondents,  we  take  it  that  same  is  the stand taken by the District Education Officer and the same is their fate as well.  Since there were several questions  regarding  the  right  to  appointment, promotion, approval etc. before the High Court and since  the  High  Court  has  finally  limited  the consideration  to  only  the  principles  of  natural justice, we are of the view that the matter, in view of  the  intervening  developments  of  the  District Education Officer rejecting the approval, needs to be sent  back  to  the  High  Court.   In  order  to  avoid another round of litigation, we grant liberty to the private respondents to challenge the validity of the order  dated  04.12.2017  passed  by  the  District Education Officer, Tirunelveli, in the pending writ appeal(s).

3. The  learned  counsel  appearing  for  the  State submits  that  the  fate  of  the  two  other  persons namely, S. Arun Arockiaraj and Suganthi Selvakumari, is also the same as in the order dated 04.12.2017. Therefore, we make it clear that in their cases also, the  order dated  04.12.2017 shall  be treated  as an order rejecting their approval as well and hence, it will  be  open  to  those  two  teachers  also  to  amend their pleadings in the writ appeal(s) before the High Court.  Accordingly, these appeals are disposed of

3

setting aside the impugned Judgment and remanding the matter  back  to  the  High  Court  for  consideration afresh.  It will be open to both the sides to take all available contentions before the High Court.  We request the High Court to go into the validity of the order  dated  04.12.2017  passed  by  the  District Education Officer.

4. Being an old matter, we request the High Court to dispose  of  the  writ  appeal(s)  expeditiously  and preferably  before  the  end  of  this  academic  year. Needless  to  say,  the  question  as  to  who  is  the competent  authority will  also be  gone into  by the High Court.

.......................J.               [ KURIAN JOSEPH ]  

.......................J.               [ A.M. KHANWILKAR ]  

New Delhi; December 11, 2017.

4

ITEM NO.301               COURT NO.5               SECTION XII                S U P R E M E  C O U R T  O F  I N D I A                        RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Civil Appeal  No(s).  10478-10498/2011 THE SECRETARY/CORRESPONDENT,  ST. JOHN'S COLLEGE AND ANR. ETC.   Appellant(s)                                 VERSUS DR. S.WILSON AND ORS. ETC.                  Respondent(s) WITH C.A. No. 10506-10510/2011 (XII) C.A. No. 2353-2355/2017 (XII) Date : 11-12-2017 These appeals were called on for hearing today. CORAM :  HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KHANWILKAR For Appellant(s) Mr. V. Prabhakar, Adv.                      Mr. R. Chandrachud, AOR

Ms. Jyoti Parasher, Adv.  Mr. N. J. Ramchander, Adv.  

                   For Respondent(s) Ms. Litta Sreenivasan, Adv.  

Mr. J. B. Ravi, Adv.  Mr. Balaji Srinivasan, AOR Mr. Romy Chacko, AOR Mr. Shubham Singh, Adv.  Mr. K. v. Vijayakumar, Adv.    

                   Mr. M. Yogesh Kanna, AOR                                                              Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, AOR                           UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following                              O R D E R C.A. No. 10506-10510 of 2011 (School Teachers' case)

The  civil  appeals  are  disposed  of  in  terms  of  the  signed non-reportable Judgment.   

Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.

5

Civil Appeal  No(s).  10478-10498/2011 and C.A. No. 2353-2355/2017  (College Teachers' case)

In view of the Judgment which we have passed above in Civil Appeal  Nos.  10506-10510  of  2011,  whereby  we  have  remitted  the appeals back to the High Court as far as the teachers of the school are concerned, we feel it appropriate to defer the Judgment in the case of college teachers till the High Court disposes of the writ appeal(s)  in  terms  of  the  Judgment  passed  above.   Ordered accordingly.  

We make it clear that the pendency of the appeals in the case of college teachers shall not stand in the way of the High Court entering an independent finding, uninfluenced by the stand taken by the High Court in the impugned judgment.  

(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA)                              (RENU DIWAN)    COURT MASTER                                ASSISTANT REGISTRAR (Signed non-reportable Judgment in Civil Appeal Nos. 10506-10510 of 2011 is placed on the file)