High Court Rejects Appointment of Shikshan Sevak Due to Non-Compliance with Recruitment Rules. Rule 9(2-A) of MEPS Rules ensures transparency and equal opportunity in teacher recruitment.

Case Note & Summary

 

Case Context:The petition challenged an order rejecting the appointment of Smt. Pooja Yogesh Singh as a Shikshan Sevak in a minority educational institution due to procedural violations, including defective advertisement and non-compliance with recruitment guidelines.

Judgment:The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the recruitment process violated Rule 9(2-A) of the MEPS Rules, 1981, and fundamental principles under Article 16 of the Constitution, which guarantees equality of opportunity in public employment.

1. Background of Petitioners and Relief Sought Petitioner 1: A teacher (Shikshan Sevak). Petitioner 2: Management of an aided minority institution. Relief Sought: Quashing the rejection of Petitioner 1's appointment and granting approval for the post. 2. Case of the Petitioners Appointment process included advertising, interviews, and selection based on merit. Contentions: TET certificate not required for secondary school appointments in minority institutions. Substantial compliance with advertisement norms before the issuance of the GR dated 10/06/2022. 3. Respondent’s Defense Advertisement published in a fortnightly newspaper without wide circulation, violating Rule 9(2-A) of MEPS Rules. Procedural lapses, such as missing documentation and lack of compliance with recruitment norms, were cited. 4. Court's Analysis and Findings Defective Advertisement: Published in a fortnightly newspaper (“Bharatiya Nagrik”) with insufficient circulation. Did not detail eligibility criteria or qualifications. Violation of Rule 9(2-A): The rule mandates publication in widely circulated local newspapers to ensure transparency. Pattern of Non-Compliance: Court highlighted a recurring issue of circumventing recruitment norms in similar cases. 5. Ratio Decidendi Transparency and equal opportunity are paramount in public employment, even for minority institutions. Failure to comply with Rule 9(2-A) renders the appointment process invalid. 6. Conclusion The Court upheld the rejection of the appointment. Petition dismissed due to non-compliance with mandatory procedural requirements. Acts and Sections Discussed: Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981:Rule 9(2-A): Mandates widely circulated newspaper advertisements for recruitment. MEPS Act, 1977: Governs employment in private aided schools. Article 16 of the Constitution: Ensures equality of opportunity in public employment. Subjects:

Recruitment Rules for Teachers in Aided Minority Institutions.MEPS Rules, Recruitment Norms, Minority Institution, Shikshan Sevak, Bombay High Court, Transparency in Employment, Public Employment, Rule 9(2-A), Article 16.