news details |
|
|
| HC holds AWES not a State, not amenable to writ jurisdiction | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Oct 23: Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court holds that Army Welfare Educational Society is not a State, not amenable to writ jurisdiction.
This singnificant judgment has been passed in petition filed by Shivali Sharma and ors seeking quashment of Article 132(B) and 132(C) of red book which is illegal, arbitrary and against the mandate of constitution of India as well as the same is violative of the principal of nature, justice and being arbitrary powers, which hits the fundamental rights of an individual and also seeking quashment of termination order dated 16.02.2024 issued by the respondent No.5 being violative of principle natural justice as well as issued by incompetent officer and without jurisdiction.
Justice Wasim Sadiq Nargal after hearing Adv Ajaz Chowdhary for the petitioners whereas DSGI Vishal Sharma for the respodents observed that Once, this Court determines that the current writ petition is not maintainable for the reasons discussed in the preceding paragraphs, it cannot examine the merits of the matter. Nevertheless, this Court cannot disregard the fact that the petitioners, who are teachers, had an exemplary service record, and one of the petitioners received the best teacher award from the respondents. In the absence of any adverse report or pending disciplinary inquiry against the petitioners as per Rule 132 (C) of the Army Welfare Education Society Rules and Regulations, what justification did the respondent authorities have for not extending the petitioners probation period or terminating their services without any substantial reasons?
Court further observed that the Army Welfare Education Society's rules and regulations explicitly state that the petitioners services may be confirmed upon successful completion of the probationary period, and in the absence of any adverse material, record, or reason against them, the respondents perhaps were not justified in terminating the petitioners services. This Court is not making any determination about the termination of the petitioners' services; the issue is left open to be addressed by the competent authorities if the petitioners pursue it before the relevant forum. This Court abstains from making any determination on the aforementioned matter due to the non-maintainability of the Writ petition for the reasons outlined above.
High Court after considering the aforementioned legal principles alongside the unique circumstances of the present case, this Court holds that the Army Welfare Educational Society does not qualify as a State, and its relationship with its teachers constitutes a private contract that cannot be enforced through writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Court acknowledges and is also conscious of the fact that there were no detrimental factors against the petitioners-teachers that might justify their termination; therefore, the petitioners are permitted to seek redressal of their grievances before appropriate forum. This Court is not inclined to exercise its inherent jurisdiction under Article 226. The instant petition is dismissed as non-maintainable, along with all miscellaneous applications. Interim direction, if any, shall stand vacated. —JNF |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
