The High Court on 05.08.2014, regarding the maintainability of a writ petition under Article 226 against a private educational institution. The case involves the change of management of St. Gabriel School to the Bengal Sappers St. Gabriel's Academy, Roorkee, and the subsequent alteration of service conditions for teaching and non-teaching staff from regular to ad-hoc without proper procedure. The judgment examines whether the private school can be considered a "State" under Article 12 of the Constitution and whether the writ petition is maintainable. The High Court upheld the learned single judge's decision that the writ petition was maintainable and found the appellant's actions invalid. The Appeal Court affirmed the High Court's decision, focusing on the public duty performed by the institution in imparting education and the doctrine of legitimate expectation.

F. Appeal Court Judgment

Findings of the Division Bench

1. Maintainability of Writ Petition:

   • The High Court upheld the learned Single Judge's decision that the writ petition against the appellant was maintainable.

2. Cancellation of Regular Appointments:

   • The learned Single Judge found the unilateral action of the appellant in changing the service conditions invalid.
   • The Benevolent Trust could not change service conditions unilaterally.

3. Role of Bengal Engineering Group Benevolent Trust:

   • The Trust did not challenge the judgment, and the appeal by the appellant was not maintainable.

4. Engagement of Private Lawyer:

   • The Deputy Commandant engaged a private lawyer without permission from the Union of India, which was not appropriate.

5. Dismissal of Appeal:

   • The Court found no illegality in the Single Judge’s judgment and dismissed the appeal.

G. Analysis

Key Question

• Was the High Court justified in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 against the appellant society?

Facts

1. Lease Agreement (1962-2012):

   • The Commandant granted land to IBSG for running a school, with lease agreements renewed up to 2012.

2. Non-renewal and Establishment of Army School (2010-2012):

   • The lease was not renewed, and BEGC planned to establish an Army Public School on the leased land.
   • Staff termination and ad-hoc reappointment were proposed.

3. Writ Petition (2012):

   • Respondents filed a writ petition challenging the termination of their services.

Position of Law

1. Enforcement of Contracts of Personal Service:

   • Generally, contracts of personal service cannot be enforced, with exceptions for public servants, workers under Industrial Law, and statutory bodies acting in breach of statutes.

2. Applicability of Article 12 and Article 226:

   • Article 12 defines "State" for fundamental rights enforcement.
   • Article 226 allows High Courts to issue writs to "any person or authority" for enforcing fundamental and non-fundamental rights.

Relevant Judgments

1. Executive Committee of Vaish Degree College v. Lakshmi Narain (1976)
2. J. Tiwari v. Jawala Devi Vidya Mandir (1979)
3. Dipak Kumar Biswas v. Director of Public Instruction (1987)
4. Tekraj v. Union of India (1988)
5. Shri Anadi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandasjiswami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust v. V. R. Rudani (1989)
6. K. Krishnamacharyulu v. Sri Venkateswara Hindu College of Engineering (1997)
7. Satimbla Sharma v. St. Paul's Senior Secondary School (2011)

Conclusion

• The High Court's decision to entertain the writ petition under Article 226 was justified, given the public duty performed by the appellant society in the context of imparting education.
• Private unaided institutions performing public functions may be subject to writ petitions under Article 226 when their actions involve public law elements.
• The relationship between the respondents and the appellant society was that of an employee and a private employer, arising out of a private contract, without a public law element.