“The managing committee of any aided minority school has absolute autonomy in appointing employees,” the court stated
NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court recently ruled that government-aided minority educational institutions have full autonomy in appointing their employees. This decision came in response to a plea by the Delhi Tamil Education Association (DTEA), which operates seven aided linguistic minority schools in the city.
READ ALSO: Delhi Govt Criticized by High Court for Northeast District Schools
The DTEA sought to fill 52 vacant positions for principals, teachers, and other staff but was denied clearance by the Delhi government’s Directorate of Education (DoE).
Justice C Hari Shankar, in a May 28 order, referred to Rule 98(2) of the Delhi School Education (DSE) Rules, which states that appointments by a managing committee of an aided school need DoE approval. However, he noted that minority institutions are exempt from this rule.
The High court emphasized that, according to the law, aided minority schools do not need DoE approval for employee appointments.
“The managing committee of any aided minority school has absolute autonomy in appointing employees,” the court highlighted.
Citing various Supreme Court judgments, Justice Shankar concluded that aided minority institutions have the absolute right to choose and appoint their principals, teachers, and other staff without needing prior DoE approval. The DoE’s role is limited to setting qualifications and experience criteria for these positions.
READ ALSO: Bomb Scare in NCR Schools | Delhi HC Seeks Report From Police
Justice Shankar further asserted that as long as appointees meet the prescribed qualifications and experience, the petitioner association has unrestricted rights to fill vacancies.
He also pointed out that the right to establish and manage minority educational institutions, guaranteed by Article 30(1) of the Constitution, includes the right to decide the members of the managing committee.
“Inherent in this right is the ability to choose the manager of the managing committee. Therefore, it is questionable whether the rule prohibiting a common manager across managing committees of schools run by one institution applies to aided minority institutions like the respondent,” stated Justice Shankar.
The High court further noted that state aid to minority institutions does not significantly alter their legal status.
“At most, the state can regulate the proper use of the aid it provides. It cannot impose its authority on the minority educational institution regarding the appointment of teachers or principals under the pretext of having granted aid to the institution,” the high court said.
The High court clarified that state aid to minority institutions does not alter their legal status. The state’s regulatory power is confined to ensuring proper use of the aid, not dictating appointments of teachers or principals.
In its ruling, the high court allowed the DTEA to fill the vacant posts of principals and teachers without DoE’s prior approval but specified that the selection committee must be constituted according to DSE Rules.
