Temporary employee of college cannot challenge dismissal

S Shyam Prasad | NT

Bengaluru: Allowing a petition filed by a Pre-University College and setting aside a lower court order which had reinstated a dismissed lecturer, the High Court of Karnataka has said that the Karnataka Education Act does not provide the opportunity for temporary employees to challenge management’s dismissal orders.

Justice ES Indiresh in his judgement said, “Having taken note of the language employed under Section 92 and 94 of the Act, Section 94 of the Act which provides remedy for dismissed employees of Private Educational Institutions to approach the Tribunal against the orders passed by the Management and same has to be read in conjunction with Section 92 of the Act, which provides for passing of an order by the Management relating to dismissal/removal or reduction in rank. Proviso to Section 92(1)(b) provides that the said provision is not applicable to the temporary employees.”

Therefore, setting aside the order passed by the Principal District and Sessions Judge, the HC said, “In that view of the matter, I find force in the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the order impugned passed by the Tribunal is liable to be rejected on the ground of jurisdictional aspects.”

The Mysore Diocesan Education Society, Mysuru, had approached the HC with a petition challenging the lower court order. The Society had removed Savari Rajan J, a temporary lecturer in Chemistry by an order on September 27, 2016. Rajan approached the District Court which by an order on March 25, 2022 set aside the Society’s order.

In the HC, the Society’s advocate argued that Rajan was not a regular employee and therefore the lower court could have no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal filed by him. The advocate for Rajan argued that though he is not a regular employee Section 94 of the Act is maintainable.

The HC however said that Section 94 had to be understood in conjunction with Section 92. Section 92(1)(b) says that Section 94 is not applicable to the temporary employees.

The HC quoted the said sub-section, “Provided that this subsection shall not apply to temporary employees or to the dismissal, removal or reduction in rank of a teacher or other employee on the ground of misconduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge involving moral turpitude.” (WP 11184/2023)