IN THE HIGH OOURT OF K NAT.KA AT BANGAIORE DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY 0? JUNE 1998 BEFORE 4 THE HON’BLE R. JUSTICE G.O.BHARUKA WRIT PETITION NO:1654148J1gj6 2 BETWEEN: 8 1. Elizabeth, major, D/o Pundalik, Head Mistress, 4 2. Marutbl. sb Rayappa, major, A 55 t. Teacher. 3. Sarojadevi, D/oNarsinga R 50, x ma;jor, 2 A 39t Teacher. 4. Manjula, D/o Yesudas, major, Aeet.Teaeber. 5. Ohigtina Sureka kant, die Johnson, major, A 85 t. Teacher. 6. Niznala , D/ 0 Amruthappa, major, Teacher. 7. Anil Kumar, sb Sharanappa, major, Aset. Teacher. • 5 : a : —: l W.P.16541—16548/96 8 ORDER Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. V. Vidya, learned H.C.G.P. for the respondents a 2. The petitioners are employees of a Private Educational institution. The relief claimed by them in the ‘ 8 present writ petition pertains to their employment. The §. Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No. 1833 to 1836/95 and connected matters (DD 30.05.1998) has held that even if z the private educational institution has been admitted to grant—in—aid under the provisions of the Grant-in-Aid Code by the State government, still no relationship of master and 3 servant between the government and the persons like the 8 petitioners comes into being and therefore, the writ petitions filed by such employees are not maintainable under r Article 226 of the Constitution of India, since they have 2 effective, efficacious and alternative statutory remedies available under the Karnataka Education Act, 1983 (in short ‘the Act’). 3. In paragraph 12 of the Judgment it has been held that . — “As regards the locus standi of staff working in the aforesaid educational institutions to maintain the writ petitions, they have got the remedy of appeal under Section 94 of the Education Act against an order of dismissal or removal from service or reduction in rank. Under Section 130, appeal is provided against any order passed by an officer or authority under the Act. Section 131 provides for revision by Government either suo moto or on an application from any person interested. Section 132 of the Education Act provides for review by the tato Gorernment ci thr rio rnoto or on an aopiation recei.ied fiom an person intr€eted, The Govtrnment jc also v’ted with the powr to giv dirE ti n under ection 133 of the Said Ac to mete cau v to oppivii e r c di t the C mminsin r r Dire tli or ot r offi r not alow th€ rark f District Fdu( at local Officer 3nd to su mit p v t. Thus, th€ Education t provides for anpval rrvis on and review in rsp2ct 4 fl’J ordo’i and in tho bscnce of nv order t h Government an be mcred for iccuing neceosary direction in exercise of its pcwe under ertion 133 and the staff can avail the Sn rvmr ftc n with rjard to paymert of ‘ L what i tted hnie with ye ard t the t€ t t.1n3 3 J i 11 t a hug ‘t ff ppli’ h other tIff al without axhau ting cuch iltcrnative ac ft I ho anne be pe n itted to i nvoki the ext r aerdi n Inc led Ic t ion of t hi a C cu it nincftr iticle 226 of the Constitution f reaid rCCeoriS the writ p titinn diem d on the ground of availability of fiacious and effacti j alterrdti it remody. How’ver all the rights and content ions of the on t ins on me it a a keflt open fo being aqitated hefie be propiite stattito CUthof itio If to 3dvieJ the p€ tit ion is may avail thei t hut r i med by WIY f filing apical / 1 101011 IF Ii Ii undcr t t w thin SIX PLEKS f m today id n th event, of i1Ing c the rrrre the c.nc-ernl authce’it will rrcp of onob cPn3l / Ij on ‘ app i Ir’i )fl w hhrn TSPEE cronthe f ‘m thc d filno ttaieof If any c [1 rem d ban toll I b h mrihhs from the ddte of ommunic’ tc n of It ordcr Sd,’ JUDGE