Consider amending MEPS Act to protect teacher’s rights: HC to State

The court was hearing a petition filed by Shankar Gopal Umrani, a former headmaster of City High School in Sangli who was denied retirement benefits

MUMBAI: In a move that is likely to bring relief to 613,181 teachers and 73,314 non-teaching staff in state-aided schools in Mahahrashtra, the Bombay high court has urged the state government to amend the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (MEPS) Act, 1977 to ensure they get retirement benefits and other protection. The court was hearing a petition filed by Shankar Gopal Umrani, a former headmaster of City High School in Sangli who was denied retirement benefits.

Consider amending MEPS Act to protect teacher’s rights: HC to State

Umrani, an assistant teacher at City High School, was promoted as headmaster in 1997. But his services were terminated in October 2014 owing to an internal dispute within the management and following a departmental enquiry under the MEPS (conditions of service) Rules, 1981.

Urmani preferred an appeal before the school tribunal, Kolhapur. On May 3, 2017, the tribunal set aside his termination order, saying although the enquiry committee was properly constituted and procedures were followed, MEPS rules and principles of natural justice were not adhered to, which vitiated the enquiry.

The school management approached the court against the tribunal order. On April 3, 2018, the court concluded that the enquiry would have to be undertaken again from the stage at which it was vitiated. Urmani would be notionally deemed reinstated but remain under suspension and be entitled to subsistence allowance pending completion of the enquiry, the court ordered.

Urmani’s counsel, advocates Satyajeet Rajeshirke and Gautam Kulkarni, argued that such punishment was not in keeping with the causes of action defined under section 9 of the Act. He had been denied justice as the Act does not prescribe any remedy for such cases, they contended.

Advocate Manjiri Parasnis, representing the state, argued that the resolution was valid and Urmani had the option of approaching the civil court.

The high court led by justices Ravindra V Ghug and Ashwin D Bhobe granted Urmani relief to approach the civil court on technical grounds, but also acknowledged the cumbersome procedure of litigation. “Such an employee is likely to face grave hardships and manifest inconvenience since he will have to approach the civil court for challenging such orders and for demanding retirement benefits or service benefits,” the court observed in the order dated December 13.

The court acknowledged a grey area in section 9 of the MEPS Act and said the punishment meted out to Urmani did not comply with it. “Any other punishment, not in the nature of the causes of action defined under section 9, would not be assailable before the tribunal”, the court noted.

It recommended the state government to amend section 9 of the Act to cover and include all such causes of action, saying, “...when section 9 was drafted, no authority could have speculated or anticipated each and every cause of action. It is only when such provisions are brought into implementation that a situation could arise or be foreseen, which may indicate a grey area not covered by the said provision.”