G. ROHINI, CHIEF JUSTICE
1. This appeal is preferred against the order of the learned Single Judge
dated 13.08.2010 in W.P.(C) No.8710/2007.
2. Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE)/the respondent No.2
in the writ petition is the appellant before us.
3. The controversy in issue relates to continuation of the respondent
No.2 herein as Principal of the Senior Secondary School run by the
respondent No.1 beyond the age of 60 years.
4. As per Rule 110(2) of the Delhi School Education Rules, 1973, the
Principal of a recognized private school, whether aided or not, is entitled to
hold office until he attains the age of 60 years. Though the respondent
LPA No.774/2010 Page 1 of 21
No.2 herein attained the age of 60 years on 30.08.2001, the respondent
No.1 by resolution dated 11.08.2001 granted extension of 5 years in
recognition of her contribution as a founder Principal and vast experience
of 29 years of teaching and administration. However, CBSE treated the
said extension as an irregularity and on that ground rejected the application
of the respondent No.1 herein for approval of additional subjects vide
order dated 30.07.2007. Subsequently, by order dated 11.09.2007, the first
respondent herein was directed by the Director of Education/GNCTD to
dispense with the services of the respondent No.2 herein. Assailing the
said two orders dated 30.07.2007 and 11.09.2007, the respondent Nos.1
and 2 herein filed W.P.(C) No.8710/2007 contending inter alia that the
petitioner No.1/respondent No.1 herein is an unaided minority institution
which receives no grant from the Government of NCT of Delhi or any
other Government authority and therefore CBSE has no right or
jurisdiction to interfere with the running and administration of the said
school. It was also contended that the post of Principal of an unaided
minority school being a key position was outside the regulatory ambit of
the State as held in Secretary Malankara Syrian Catholic College v. T.
Jose & Ors.(2007) 1 SCC 386.
Source: Indian Kanoon