Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

7. In the case of Shri Cadge Maharaj Mission and Ors. v. Wasudeo Ramji Patil, (Writ Petition No. 869 of 2000), another learned Single Judge of this Court held that an Ashram School is not a "private school" within the meaning of Section 2(20) of the M.E.P.S. Act. The said view came to be confirmed in Letters Patent Appeal No. 111 of 2001.

8. The Government of Maharashtra through its Tribal Development Department came out with "Ashram School Code" in 2001 and provided for a remedy of an appeal under Section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act before the School Tribunal against the order of punishment imposed against an employee of an Ashram School.

9. The issues for our considerations pursuant to the reference order made by the learrted Single Judge are as follows :

"(a) Whether an "Ashram School" is a "private school" within the meaning of Section 2(20) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulations Act, 1977?

(b) If answer to the aforesaid first issue is in the negative, whether an employee of an Ashram School has a remedy of an appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulations Act, 1977 against an order of punishment passed by the Management in view of the Ashram School Code formulated by the Stale Government?"

17. We now come to the Ashram Schools Code as formulated by the State Government in the year 2001. It is well established in law that the provisions of a statute cannot be amended by administrative orders, circulars or Codes. The provisions of Section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act state that notwithstanding anything contained in any other law or contract for the time being in force any employee in a private school who is dismissed or removed or whose services are otherwise terminated or who is reduced in rank by the order passed by the management or who is superseded by the management while making an appointment to any post by promotion shall have a right of an appeal and may appeal against any such order or supersession to the Tribunal constituted under Section 8 of the said Act, When a statute has provided a remedy to an employee in a private school, such a remedy cannot be extended to an employee in any school and the meaning of the terms 'employee' and 'private school' cannot be altered or amended by formulating a Code.

(a) There is no controversy between the views enunciated by the respective Division Benches in Writ Petition No. 2919 of 1991 and Letters Patent Appeal No. 293 of 1999.

(b) Secondary or Higher Secondary Ashram Schools or Blind Schools are "private schools" within the meaning of Section 2(20) of the M.E.P.S. Act and any employee of such a school has a remedy of an appeal under Section 9 of the said Act.

(c) The Ashram School Code providing for remedy of an appeal to the employees working in the basic/primary Ashram Schools is contrary to the provisions of Section 9 of the Act and to that extent same is hereby held to be invalid. It is declared that an employee working in a primary Ashram school or any other school which does not fall within the ambit of the term "private school" cannot approach the School Tribunal under Section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act.