Writ Petition Not Maintainable Against Private Unaided School in Non-Teaching Staff Termination | HC
- Blog|News|Labour & Industrial Laws|
- 2 Min Read
- By Taxmann
- |
- Last Updated on 28 November, 2025

Case Details: Rakesh Kumar Tomar vs. D.A.V. College Managing Committee [2025] 180 taxmann.com 251 (HC-Delhi)
Judiciary and Counsel Details
- Prateek Jalan, J.
-
Anil Mittal, Shaurya Mittal & Atul Chauhan, Advs. for the Petitioner.
-
Anurag Lakhotia & Udit, Advs. for the Respondent.
Facts of the Case
In the instant case, the original petitioner, a non-teaching employee working as an Accounts Clerk in a private unaided school affiliated to CBSE at Noida, was terminated on the ground of absence without leave for two years.
His representation against termination was rejected. Thereafter, he filed a writ petition challenging the termination order and the rejection of his representation. The School raised a preliminary objection that the writ petition regarding a service dispute against a private unaided school was not maintainable.
It was noted that the employment of non-teaching employees in a private unaided school has not been considered to be an inseparable part of the obligation to impart education, and, therefore, a writ petition would not lie in such a case.
High Court Held
The High Court held that the conditions of service of the original petitioner were not governed by the statutory framework. Further, affiliation of the respondent school to CBSE was also of no assistance to the petitioner. Therefore, the writ petition was to be disposed of, with liberty to petitioners to agitate their grievances in appropriate proceedings in accordance with the law.
List of Cases Referred to
- St. Mary’s Education Society v. Rajendra Prasad Bhargava (2023) 4 SCC 498 (para 4)
- Bharat Mata Saraswati Bal Mandir Senior Secondary School v. Vinita Singh 2023 SCC OnLine Del 3934 (para 7)
- Army Welfare Education Society v. Sunil Kumar Sharma 2024 SCC OnLine SC 1683 (para 11)
- Marwari Balika Vidyalaya v. Asha Srivastava [2019] 2 taxmann.com 1928 (SC) (para 12)
- Ramesh Ahluwalia v. State of Punjab [2013] 9 taxmann.com 572 (SC) (para 12)
- Andi Mukta Sadguru Shree Muktajee Vandas Swami Suvarna Jayanti Mahotsav Samark Trust v. V.R. Rudani (1992) 2 SCC 691 (para 12)
- Gregory Patrao v. Mangalore Refinery and Petrochemicals Limited (2022) 10 SCC 461 (para 13).
Disclaimer: The content/information published on the website is only for general information of the user and shall not be construed as legal advice. While the Taxmann has exercised reasonable efforts to ensure the veracity of information/content published, Taxmann shall be under no liability in any manner whatsoever for incorrect information, if any.

Taxmann Publications has a dedicated in-house Research & Editorial Team. This team consists of a team of Chartered Accountants, Company Secretaries, and Lawyers. This team works under the guidance and supervision of editor-in-chief Mr Rakesh Bhargava.
The Research and Editorial Team is responsible for developing reliable and accurate content for the readers. The team follows the six-sigma approach to achieve the benchmark of zero error in its publications and research platforms. The team ensures that the following publication guidelines are thoroughly followed while developing the content:
- The statutory material is obtained only from the authorized and reliable sources
- All the latest developments in the judicial and legislative fields are covered
- Prepare the analytical write-ups on current, controversial, and important issues to help the readers to understand the concept and its implications
- Every content published by Taxmann is complete, accurate and lucid
- All evidence-based statements are supported with proper reference to Section, Circular No., Notification No. or citations
- The golden rules of grammar, style and consistency are thoroughly followed
- Font and size that’s easy to read and remain consistent across all imprint and digital publications are applied

CA | CS | CMA