Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4. The respondent management filed WVMP Nos.838 and 389 of 2002 to vacate the order of interim stay passed in both the writ petitions. When the said petitions came up for orders, with the consent of counsel for either side, both the writ petitions were taken up for final disposal.

5. According to the respondent, the petitioner in both the writ petitions are not entitled to any relief in these writ petitions and there are no merits. According to the respondent, the respondent South India Union of Seventh Day Adventist Board of Education has established numerous unaided minority schools in South India. The respondent has established 64 such schools in Tamil Nadu and Pondicherry employing over 2000 teaching staff. The schools are administered/managed by the Board of Education. In the school at Vepery the petitioner is employed as a teacher. The said school is an unaided minority matriculation school. It is pointed out that the order of transfer has been passed by the South India Union of Seventh Day Adventist Board of Education having its office at No.197, GST Road, Vandalur, Chennai-48 and without impleading the said authority, the petitioner has impleaded the school represented by the Secretary and therefore the writ petitions are bad for nonjoinder of necessary and proper party. It is incorrect to state that the respondent-school is an aided school while factually the respondent is an unaided religious minority school. It is contended that the respondent is not amenable to the jurisdiction of this court under Article 226.

7. It is further contended that the Employees Hand Book of the SDA Schools provides for a transfer of teacher appointed by the said South India Union of Seventh Day Adventists Board of Education and it also provides for payment of transfer allowance. Therefore the transfer is valid, nor it is violative of the Tamil Nadu Recognised Private School (Regulation) Act, 1973. The petitioner has already been relieved from SDA School Vepery on 13.6.202 and she has to report at SDA School, Panrutti on 17.6.2002. At that stage, the present writ petition has been moved and interim orders have been passed. It is contended that the Full Bench judgment in 1998 (III) MLJ, 592 has no application to the facts of the case. It is also pointed out by the respondent that numerous transfer orders are being passed from time to time from one school to another school established by the said South India Union of Seventh Day Adventists Board of Education and the averment to the contra are false. The school at Panrutti is also a large school ant the respondent has got the authority and jurisdiction to transfer the petitioner and no interference is called for with the order of transfer.

10. Both the points could be considered together. It is admitted at the hearing by Mr.C.P.Siva Mohan, the learned counsel for the petitioners that the respondent school is an unaided minority private schools established by the South India Union of Seventh Day Adventists Board of Education. It is also admitted that neither the said Board nor the Schools established by the Board are receiving grant. The orders of appointment it is admitted, has been issued by the South India Union of Seventh Day Adventists Board of Education by its Secretary. It is further admitted that as seen from the amended Employee Hand Book, whenever appointment of a Teacher or non teaching teacher is made, in the appointment order it is provided that the appointment is subject to the Rules of the Organisation outlined in the Employee' s Hand Book. In fact few of the appointment orders in respect of the teachers employed in the schools were placed before the Court. It is also brought to the notice of the court that the said Board has transferred teachers from one school to another school throughout the State and it is admitted that it is the usual annual exercise of practice.

12. That apart, being a Matriculation School, the school is governed by the provisions of the Code of Regulations for Matriculation Schools. It is the case of Mr.C.P.Sivamohan that in respect of service conditions, no agreement has been entered between the petitioners in both the writ petitions and the respondent and therefore the petitioner in each writ petition cannot be transferred. This contention do not deserve any further consideration as the very appointment of the petitioners is subject to the regulations namely the Rules and Regulation of Seventh Day Adventists Organisation's Employee Hand Book. Though a feeble attempt was made that the Hand Book produced by the counsel for the respondent is of the year 1988 and the petitioners have been appointed earlier and the provisions contained in the Hand Book has no application. This cannot be sustained at all.