Pvt, aided, unaided institutions under educational tribunals: HC

Saurabh Malik

Tribune News Service

Chandigarh, June 15

Putting to an end the dispute over the jurisdiction of educational tribunals in Haryana, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that private, aided and even unaided educational institutions came under its cover.

The ruling by Justice Deepak Sibal came after one of the parties to litigation claimed that the tribunals provided an alternative remedy. These did not constitute a bar towards the maintainability of writ petition before the High Court.

“I can safely hold that the educational tribunals, which have been constituted through the notification dated March 2, 2015, are not just for settling disputes pertaining to service matters of employees of only private educational institutions but also all aided/unaided educational institutions in Haryana,” Justice Sibal asserted.

In his petition before the High Court, Management Development Institute employee Dr Mukul Gupta had earlier challenged the termination of his services. He had also prayed for issuance of directions to reinstate him as the institute’s Director, with all consequential benefits.

Raising a preliminary issue, counsel for the respondents sought dismissal of the writ petition after relying on the March 2 notification. They claimed that the petitioner had the efficacious alternative remedy of filing an appeal against the termination of his services before the Gurgaon Educational Tribunal.

Taking up the matter, Justice Sibal asserted a plain reading of the notification led him to an irresistible conclusion that it covered within its ambit disputes of employees, pertaining to punishment or termination of services, with the management of any aided and unaided educational institution in Haryana.

Justice Sibal added distinction between private colleges or otherwise was not made by the apex court. It simply issued directions for setting up educational tribunals for adjudicating disputes of employees of all aided and unaided educational institutions.

Disposing of the petition, Justice Sibal added: “The educational tribunal is manned by a district judge, who by virtue of the post and years of experience cannot by any length of imagination not to be considered as an efficacious forum, especially when the forum has been chosen by none other than the apex court in TMA Pai Foundation’s case. All issues raised by the petitioner with regard to the challenge to his impugned termination can effectively be gone into by the concerned district judge concerned who constitutes the educational tribunal…”.