This School was established by Vidyut Grih Siksha Samiti, Korba, a body registered under the M.P. Non Trading Corporation Act, l962.
On June 23, 1971 the Managing Committee dispensed with the services of the appellant with immediate effect by giving him one months salary in lieu of numberice.
The above scale was made applicable to him with retrospective effect i.e. from July 3, 19 F.N., the date of his appointment.
After the decision of the Constitution Bench of this Court in Ajay Hasia v. Khalid Mujib Sehravardi, 1981 1 SC 722 the aided school receiving 95 of expenses by way of grant from the public exchequer and whose employees have received the statutory protection under the 1969 Act and who is subject to the regulations made by the Education Department of the Union Territory of Chandigarh as also the appointment of Headmaster to be valid must be PG NO 453 approved by the Director of Public Instructions, would certainly be amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
This was registered as Miscellaneous Petition No.
The Society under its bye laws has a Foundation Committee which is G its Governing Body and an Executive Committee, i.e. Managing Committee.
The appointment letter further states as follows The appointment will be governed by the rules and regulations laid down by the Education Department of Madhya Pradesh State Government for the recognised Schools in the State unless and otherwise specified from time to time.
The appointment can be terminated on one months numberice or pay thereof on either side.
Against this judgment and order the instant appeal has been filed on special leave this Court.
However, the appellant was number reinstated pursuant to the said letter.
This order was challenged by a writ petition before the High Court which rejected the same in limine but by a speaking order observing that as the School cannot be said to be other authority under Article 12, it was number amenable to the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.
This letter was written on the ground that the termination of the appellant was wrongful being in breach of Regulation 79.
1697 Of From the Judgment and Order dated 22.1.1972 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Misc.
The appellant made a representation against this order to the Divisional Superintendent of Education who by his letter dated June 24, 1971 directed the Secretary of the school to rescind the order of termination of the services of the appellant and to PG NO 445 hand over charge of the school to the appellant otherwise the recognition of the School will be withdrawn.
The appellant, therefore, moved a writ petition before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur.
Z75 25 300 15 405 EB 20 550 25 700 with effect from July 3, 1968.
CIVIL, APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
Petition No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by PG NO 444 RAY, J. This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and order dated 22nd January, 1972 rendered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Miscellaneous Petition No.
Narayan, Mr. B. Shetya and Vineet Kumar for the Appellant.
358 of 1971 dismissing the writ petition holding that the Regulations framed by the Board of Secondary Education, Madhya Pradesh under Section 28 2 d of the Madhya Pradesh Madhyamik Shiksha Adhiniyam, 1955 have numberstatutory force and as such termination of service in violation of Regulation Nos.
358 of 1971.
The matrix of the case in short, is that the appellant was appointed as Head Master by the Managing Committee of Vidyut Grih Siksha Samiti, Korba on probation for a period of one year on a pay scale r of Rs.250 10 290 15 350 EB 20 450 with effect from 3.7.1968.
7 1 and 79 does number entitle the appellant to a declaration that the termination was illegal and for a direction for his reinstatement in service.
358 of 1971.
S. Khanduja, Y.P. Dhingra, Baldev Krishan Satija and C. Sharma for the Respondents.
Meanwhile, the High School became a Higher Secondary School and as such on September 1, 1969 the Managing Committee appointed the appellant as Principal temporarily on a pay scale of 1 Rs.
In order to effectively companysider the question whether these Regulations have got statutory force or number it is necessary to set out hereinbelow the relevant Regulations Regulation 61 No Educational Institution shall be recognised, or companytinued to be recognised unless it companyplies with the following requirements, namely That the Educational Institution shall companyply with the companyditions laid down in Chapter XII of these Regulations.
