IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.S. DINESH KUMAR WRIT PETITION No.27402 OF 2019 (S-DIS) BETWEEN:
MS. VEENA W/O MR. MARIA HARISH AGED ABOUT 32 YEARS R/AT NO.30, VINAYAKA RESIDENCY HANUMANTAPPA LAYOUT KANAK NAGAR, HORAMAVU POST BANGALORE-560 043 …PETITIONER (BY SHRI. PRAVEEN KUMAR HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND:
1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY MINISTRY OF LABOUR AND EMPLOYMENT GOVT. OF INDIA SHRAM SHAKTI BHAWAN RAFI MARG NEW DELHI-110 001 2. STATE OF KARNATAKA REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LABOUR "KARMIKA BHAVAN" BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560 029 KARNATAKA 3. SRI. SATHYANARAYANA EDUCATIONAL TRUST REGISTERED TRUST NO.74, DODDABANASWADI RAMAMURTHYNAGAR MAIN ROAD BANGALORE-560 043 REPRESENTED BY ITS TRUSTEE ... RESPONDENTS (BY SMT. L.V. APARNA, CGC FOR R1;
SHRI. M.V. RAMESH JOIS, AGA FOR R2; SHRI. AMIT DESHPANDE, ADVOCATE FOR R3) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IMPUGNED ORDER DTD:22.5.2019 PASSED BY THE R-3 ANNEXURE-A AND ETC., THIS WRIT PETITION COMING ON FOR ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER Heard Shri Praveen Kumar Hiremath, learned advocate for petitioner, Shri L.V.Aparna, learned CGC for respondent No.1, Shri M.V.Ramesh Jois, learned AGA for respondent No.2 and Shri Amit Deshpande, learned advocate for respondent No.3.
2. Petitioner was working as a computer teacher in New Baldwin International Residential School, Mandur, run by respondent No.3-Trust, which is a private un-aided Institution.
3. Petitioner’s grievance is that she could not have been terminated while she was on her family way. Learned advocate for petitioner placed reliance on Section 12(2)(a) of the Maternity Benefit Act, 1961, to contend that termination of a women employee during her pregnancy is bad in law.
4. Shri Amit Deshpande, for respondent No.3 submitted that school is run by a private Trust and therefore, writ petition is not maintainable. Petitioner’s remedy is under Education Act before Education Appellate Tribunal.
5. Learned CGC and learned AGA also argued opposing the petition.
6. Admittedly, petitioner was working as a computer teacher in a private un-aided institution. Challenge under this writ petition is the order of termination dated 22.05.2019 (Annexure-A). Therefore, this writ petition is not maintainable.
7. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with liberty to petitioner to seek appropriate remedy before appropriate forum.
No costs.
Sd/- JUDGE AV