Private schools and the law: India
This is a collection of articles archived for the excellence of their content.
Readers will be able to edit existing articles and post new articles directly
Retirement of teachers
Private schools can make teachers retire: HC
From the archives of The Times of India 2007, 2009
Pvt schools can make teachers retire, says HC
New Delhi: The Delhi high court has held that recognised private schools can force teachers to take premature retirement, saying it ‘‘eliminates stagnation’’ and ‘‘promotes vibrancy’’ in organizations.
‘‘An order of compulsory retirement is an important tool to keep any organization vibrant and to prevent its decay by sheer weight of long standing employees who have ceased to be the dynamos to propel the organization further and for achieving its goals,’’ said justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw.
Turning down the plea of a trained graduate teacher that there is no public interest involved in forcing her to retire, the court said schools should not be forced to continue with such person’s service at the cost of future citizens.
It held the order forcing an employee to retire could not be treated as a punishment and carries no stigma. PTI
Cannot ask school to allow faith- based dress
December 13, 2018: The Times of India
A private school cannot be directed to allow students to alter uniforms as per religious beliefs, the Kerala high court held.
Two Muslim students of Christ Nagar Senior Secondary School in Thiruvananthapuram, represented by their father Mohd Sunir, wanted to wear headscarves and full-sleeved shirts to school. He moved the court as the school asked them to follow the prescribed uniform. He said choice of clothing is a fundamental right to religion under Article 25-1 of the Constitution.
Justice A Muhamed Mustaque said the petitioners had the fundamental right to choice of dress based on religious injunctions but the school management had the fundamental right to establish, manage and administer an institution under Article 19.
“The dominant interest represents the larger interest and the subservient interest represents only individual interest. If the dominant interest is not allowed to prevail, subservient interest would march over the dominant interest resulting in chaos,” the court said. The court said the Constitutional right is not intended to protect one right by annihilating the rights of others.
“The Constitution intends to assimilate plural interests within its scheme without any conflict or in priority. However, when there is a priority of interest, individual interest must yield to the larger interest,” said Justice Mustaque.