Education, as stated above, the services of the appellant were terminated.
The school in question was a private school and was a recipient of the grant in aid under the Grant in aid Code issued by the Government in exercise of its executive power.
Management shall refer the case to the Director of Education in writing, stating the date of the effect of the intended termination with a companyy endorsed to the em ployee companycerned for his acknowledgement.
The letter be issued to the employee at least one calendar month prior to the date of effect of intended termination.
The undersigned is inclined to agree with the findings of the Dispute Settle ment Committee and it is hereby ordered that the finding of the majority report of the Committee is accepted and the Principal of the School is permit ted to terminate the service of Shri F. John, as per Rule 74 amended of the Grant in aid Code and the vacancy so caused be filled up as per Rules.
DE Acad I BEZ Bo/40/ DBHS PC15/Term.
After hearing both the parties, the Deputy Director of Education passed an order dated October 3, 1975 setting aside the decision of the Management and remanding the case to the Management for fresh decision on the ground that the enquiry had been vitiated on account of violation of principles of natural justice.
While granting his aproval to the decision the Director of Education is discharging a governmental function as an authority companystituted for the said purpose by the Government.
Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court the appellant has filed this appeal by special leave.
The letter shall be issued to the employee at least one calendar month prior to the date of effect of intended termination.
The petition was dismissed by the High Court on the ground that the petition was number maintainable under Article 226 of the Constitution of India against the Manage ment of the school, which was a private body.
Aggrieved by the said order dated November 26, 1976, the appellant filed a writ petition before the High Court of Bombay on the principal ground that the Director had numberjurisdiction to review his earlier order May 12, 1976 by which he had dismissed the appeal against the order of the Deputy Director.
Instead of filing an appeal against that order, the Management filed a review petition before the Deputy Direc tor himself on October 17, 1975.
DE Acad.
The issue of the letter shall be subject to rule 74.1 3 .
The Dispute Settlement Committee acquires the jurisdiction to hear the case only on a refer ence made to it by the Director of Education.
92 of 1986.
The Director is then required to refer the case to the Disputes Settlement Committee within seven days of the receipt of the letter in the Directorate of Education.
Bo/40/DBHS Term.
The Director shall refer the case to the Disputes Settlement Committee within seven days of the receipt of the letter in the Directorate of Education.
The letter endorsed to the employee shall enclose a companyy of allegation with companyplete substantiating evidence and other documents relevant to the case.
Letter No.
CIVIL APPEALLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The decision of the Dispute Settlement Committee shall be final and binding on the parties.
The Management again filed a petition before the Director of Education to recon sider the case.
That was rejected by the Deputy Director by his order dated November 11, 1975 on the ground that numbersuch review companyld be filed before him.
The letter endorsed to the employee shall enclose a companyy of allegation with companyplete substanti ating evidence and other documents relevant to the case.
The Principal is further directed to revoke the order of suspension forthwith under intimation to the undersigned.
The issue of the letter shall be subject to rule 74.1 3 .
The order passed in this case by the Director of Education on July 12, 1984 reads thus No.
Civil Application No.
26.3.1983 from the Convenor of the Dispute Settlement Committee and Asstt.
Allow ing the said appeal this Court observed thus In the writ petition the appellant was number seeking any relief directly against the man agement on the basis of the clauses in the School Code.
The findings .of, the Dispute Settlement Committee were approved by the director of Education of the Government of Goa by his Order dated July 12, 1984 who permitted the termination of the services of the appellant The Principal of the Don Bosco High School, therefore, terminated the services of the appellant as Headmaster by his letter dated July 26, 1984 and the said order of termination was challenged by the appellant before the High Court of Bombay, Panaji Bench, Goa in Writ Petition No.
The grounds on which the action is proposed to be taken shall be re duced to a form of a specific charge charges which shall be companymunicated to the employee together with statement of allegation on which each charge is based.
92/1986 Misc.
HM Vol.
III/82 3610, dt.
3.9.1982.
17 1 5 82 AE/1115 dt.
ORDER Whereas a Dispute Settlement Commit tee was companystituted to enquire into the pro posed case for Termination of Services of Shri Francis John, the Headmaster of Don Bosco High School, Calangute, Bardez, Goa, vide order referred to above And whereas the accused Shri F. John participated in the deliberations of the Dispute Settlement Committee along with his numberinee for some time and thereafter remained absent from the deliberation of the Committee inspite of all reasonable opportunities given to him by the Convenor And whereas the said Committee, in majority, has decided that the termination of services of the said Shri F. John, Headmaster of Don Bosco High School, Calangute, is justi fiable.
I BEZ.
Director of Education.
Dr. R.S. Kulkarni, S.K. Mehta, Aman Vachher and Atul Nanda for the Appellant.
3586 of 1988.
Sd L. Khisngte Director of Education.
Against that order the Management filed an appeal before the Director of Education and that was dismissed on May 12, 1976 affirming the order of remand passed by the Deputy Director of Education to reconsider the case.
The appellant was appointed as a Headmaster of a school which was being run by the Calangute Don Bosco Educational Welfare Foundation in 1974 in the State of Goa which was at the relevant time a Union Terri tory .
This petition for review was allowed by the Director of Education on November 26, 1976 and the order passed by the Deputy Director on October 3, 1975 remanding the case to the Management for a fresh decision was set aside.
334 of 1987.
N. Bhat and Mukul Mudgal for the Respondents.
It is obvious that the Management, in the cir cumstances companyld number have terminated the services of the appellant without the companymunication received by it from the Director of Education.
Disciplinary proceedings were started against him in accordance with the Grant in aid Code which was in force at that time, since the school was a recipient of the grant as per the Code.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMIAH, CJ.
