TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (9) TMI 1135
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant on 17.11.2006. On the basis of the aforesaid misconduct, the Appellant was issued a warning letter by the Principal Smt. Neera Sharma on 9th December, 2006. On 21st December, 2006, Smt. Jaswinder Kaur made another written complaint addressed to the Manager. 4. The Appellant complains that without granting any opportunity of being heard, on 1st February, 2007 he was downgraded and transferred to another school to work as an Assistant. This order was also passed by Principal Smt. Neera Sharma. Again, on 8th February, 2007, Smt. Jaswinder Kaur submitted a further affidavit regarding her complaint. Therefore, a Memorandum/ Charge-sheet dated 17th March, 2007 was served upon the Appellant under Bye-law 47 of the Central Board of Secondary Education Affiliation Bye-Laws. After obtaining the explanation of the Appellant, the Manager of the Managing Committee of the school, being the Disciplinary Authority, appointed an Inquiry Officer and a regular inquiry was held against the Appellant. 5. We may notice here that the Principal Smt. Neera Sharma appeared before the Inquiry Officer as Management Witness No. 2. Ultimately, the charges were said to have been proved against the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid writ petition has been dismissed by the learned Single Judge in limine, but by passing a speaking order. Relying on the judgment of this Court in Zee Telefilms Limited and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. (2005) 4 SCC 649, the Appellant had submitted that he was entitled to invoke the extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India as the Respondent school was performing public functions by providing education to young children. The aforesaid submission of the Appellant has been rejected by the learned Single Judge with the following observations: After hearing counsel, for the Appellant, I do not find any force in the contention raised by him. The Respondent school, being an unaided and a private school being managed by a Society, is not an instrumentality of the State, in my opinion, the Appellant has the efficacious remedy to challenge the impugned orders before the Civil Court. In the instant case, while challenging the impugned orders, the Appellant has raised certain disputed questions of facts. Thus, in the facts and circumstances of the case, I am not inclined to entertain this petition and the same is accordingly, dis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Government. Such control must be particular to the body in question and must be pervasive. If this is found then the body is a State within Article 12. On the other hand, when the control is merely regulatory whether under statute or otherwise, it would not serve to make the body a State. 11. We have considered the submissions made by the Learned Counsel for the parties. In our opinion, in view of the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust (supra), there can be no doubt that even a purely private body, where the State has no control over its internal affairs, would be amenable to the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, for issuance of a writ of mandamus. Provided, of course, the private body is performing public functions which are normally expected to be performed by the State Authorities. In the aforesaid case, this Court was also considering a situation where the services of a Lecturer had been terminated who was working in the college run by the Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Smarak Trust. In those circumst....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the writ petition would not be maintainable merely because the Respondent - institution is a purely unaided private educational institution. The Appellant had specifically taken the plea that the Respondents perform public functions, i.e. providing education to children in their institutions throughout India. We must, however, notice that the learned Single Judge has dismissed the writ petition also on the ground that it involves disputed questions of fact. Mr. Ray, Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Respondents has submitted that the Appellant actually has not been able to contradict any of the proven facts. According to the Learned Counsel, the remedy of the Appellant is to file a civil suit, if so advised. Therefore, the writ petition has been rightly dismissed by the High Court. 14. Mr. Parikh, Learned Counsel for the Appellant, however, submits that civil suit would not be an alternative efficacious remedy in the facts of this case. In support of this submission, he brought to our notice certain observations made by a Constitution Bench of this Court in T.M.A. Rai Foundation and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Ors. (2002) 8 SCC 481. Learned Counsel pointed out tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... management, it was not appropriate for Smt. Neera Sharma to participate in the proceedings of the Disciplinary Committee. Given the background of the allegations made by the Appellant at all stages of the enquiry not only against the principle, but also the Manager of the School, it was necessary for her to disassociate from the proceedings, to nullify any plea of apprehended bias. Furthermore, when the appeal was being decided by the Disciplinary Committee with regard to the legality or otherwise of the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority, the decision of the Disciplinary Committee not only had to be fair but it also had to appear, to be fair. This is in conformity with the principle that justice must not only be done, but must also appear to be done. Actual and demonstrable fair play must be the hallmark of the proceedings and the decisions of the administrative and quasi judicial tribunals. In particular, when the decisions taken by these bodies are likely to cause adverse civil consequences to the persons against whom such decisions are taken. For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 18th/19th December, 2008 passed by the Disciplinary Committee is hereby quashed and s....