Chandana Das (Malakar) v. The State of West Bengal and Others
Background
The appellants were appointed as teachers at Khalsa Girls High School in Calcutta, a school established for the Punjabi-speaking Sikh community, but the District Inspector of Schools refused to approve their appointments on the ground that they had not been recommended by the statutory School Service Commission, as required for non-minority aided institutions. A single judge of the Calcutta High Court held the school was a linguistic minority institution entitled to appoint its own teachers, but a Division Bench reversed this, holding the school had never formally claimed minority status and so was bound by the general appointment rules. When the matter reached the Supreme Court, two judges (T.S. Thakur, J. and R. Banumathi, J.) disagreed with each other on the outcome, so the case was referred to this three-judge bench to resolve the conflict.
Decision Breakdown
The three-judge bench agreed with the view earlier taken by Thakur, J.: that a genuine linguistic or religious minority institution retains its constitutional right under Article 30 to appoint teachers of its choice, and this right is not lost simply because the institution sought a "special constitution"/grant arrangement with the State Education Board, since the State's regulatory power over eligibility conditions does not extend to taking away the core right of appointment itself. The Court also rejected the State's final plea to refer the matter further to a Constitution Bench, distinguishing the cited precedent as dealing with different facts (majority/minority status under a different Punjab statute). Consequently, the Single Judge's ruling (recognising the school's minority status and upholding the appellants' appointments) was restored, and the Division Bench's contrary ruling was set aside. The appeals were allowed with no order as to costs.
Lesson Learnt
A linguistic or religious minority institution's constitutional right to appoint its own teachers survives even if it also participates in State grant-in-aid or "special constitution" schemes: the State can regulate qualifications and standards, but cannot use such schemes to force the institution to surrender its core right to choose its own staff.