{"id":123234,"date":"1998-09-07T00:00:00","date_gmt":"1998-09-06T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998"},"modified":"2018-09-04T20:59:06","modified_gmt":"2018-09-04T15:29:06","slug":"n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","title":{"rendered":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"docsource_main\">Supreme Court of India<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_title\">N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_author\">Author: Thomas.<\/div>\n<div class=\"doc_bench\">Bench: S. Saghir Ahmad, K.T. Thomas<\/div>\n<pre>           PETITIONER:\nN. AMMAD\n\n\tVs.\n\nRESPONDENT:\nTHE MANAGER, EMJAY HIGH SCHOOL &amp; ORS.\n\nDATE OF JUDGMENT:\t07\/09\/1998\n\nBENCH:\nS. SAGHIR AHMAD, K.T. THOMAS\n\n\n\n\nACT:\n\n\n\nHEADNOTE:\n\n\n\nJUDGMENT:\n<\/pre>\n<p>J U D G M E N T<br \/>\nTHOMAS.\t J.\n<\/p>\n<p>Special leave granted.\n<\/p>\n<p>The simple question in these appeals is this :\t  Is<br \/>\nthe  management\t of  a\tminority  school  free to choose and<br \/>\nappoint any qualified person as Headmaster of the school  or<br \/>\nwhether\t such  management is hedged by any legislative edict<br \/>\nor executive fiat in doing so?\n<\/p>\n<p>The above question arose when management of a school<br \/>\nsought to appoint  4th\trespondent  (P.M.    Aboobacker)  as<br \/>\nHeadmaster thereof.   The  school  is:\t  &#8220;Emjay  Vocational<br \/>\nHigher Secondary  School&#8221;.     Valliapplli   Taluk   Calicut<br \/>\nDistrict,  Kerala  (hereinafter referred to a &#8216;the school&#8217;).<br \/>\nThis move was stiffly resisted by the appellant who  is\t the<br \/>\nseniormost teacher  in\tthe  school.\tAt his instance, the<br \/>\nDistrict Education Officer (DEO) interfered but of no avail.<br \/>\nAppellant thereupon filed a writ petition in the High  Court<br \/>\nof  Kerala  for\t a writ of mandamus to the management of the<br \/>\nschool to appoint him as Headmaster, Learned Single Judge of<br \/>\nthe High Court, who heard the writ petition, alllowed it and<br \/>\nissued a direction as prayed for by the appellant.    But  a<br \/>\nDivision  Bench of the High Court reversed that judgment and<br \/>\ndismissed the write petition.  Hence, appellant has come  up<br \/>\nto this Court seeking special leave to appeal.<br \/>\nSome more facts will be advantageous to focus on the<br \/>\npoint in dispute.\n<\/p>\n<p>Appellant  was\tappointed  as a teacher (High School<br \/>\nAssistant &#8211; HSA\t &#8211;  as\tit  is\tcalled)\t in  the  school  on<br \/>\n3-6-1982,  and in June 1991 he become the seniormost teacher<br \/>\nthere.\tThe post of Headmaster of  the\tschool\tfell  vacant<br \/>\nduring that time.  None in the teaching staff of the school,<br \/>\nincluding  the\tappellant,  was qualified to be appointed as<br \/>\nHeadmaster then.  One of the  requisites  for  the  post  of<br \/>\nHeadmaster,  as\t per  the  relevant  rules,  is that he must<br \/>\npossess a minimum  service  qualification  of  12  years  of<br \/>\ncontinuous graduate service.  Appellant would have completed<br \/>\nthe said period of 12 years only in June 1994.\tNonetheless,<br \/>\nappellant was put in charge as Headmaster of the school with<br \/>\nthe approval of the DEO concerned.  When appellant completed<br \/>\nthe required period for service qualification he pressed the<br \/>\nmanagement to  appoint\thim  as regular Headmaster.  The DEO<br \/>\nalso sent a communication to the management requesting\tthem<br \/>\n&#8220;to  promote  and  appoint  a  qualified  seniormost  HSA as<br \/>\nHeadmaster with immediate  effect&#8221;.    But  the\t management,<br \/>\ninstead\t of  acceeding to the aforesaid request, brought 4th<br \/>\nrespondent (who was a graduate teacher having larger  period<br \/>\nservice\t than  the  appellant)\tfrom another school as per a<br \/>\ntransfer order which  was  approved  by\t the  department  on<br \/>\n5-6-1994, and appointed him as Headmaster of the school.  It<br \/>\nwas  then  that\t the  appellant\t filed the writ petition for<br \/>\nissuing appropriate directions including a direction to sent<br \/>\n4th respondent back to the school wherefrom he was brought.<br \/>\nSome  undisputed  factual  features  are  these; The<br \/>\nschool was declared by the Government as a  Muslim  Minority<br \/>\nCommunity School as per\t G.O.\t(RT) 2959\/94\/G.\t Edn.  It is<br \/>\nan aided school and is governed by  the\t provisions  of\t the<br \/>\nKerala Education  Act,\t1958  (for  short  &#8216;the\t Act&#8217;).\t 4th<br \/>\nrespondent is qualified to be appointed as Headmaster on the<br \/>\ndate when he was appointed as such and he has longer service<br \/>\nthan the appellant as HSA, though he had such service  in  a<br \/>\ndifferent school.  As per the relevant rules, when a teacher<br \/>\nis  transferred\t from  one school to another his rank in the<br \/>\nnew school shall be fixed next below the juniormost  teacher<br \/>\nin the school in the particular grade.<br \/>\nThe contention of the appellant is that he being the<br \/>\nseniormost  graduate  teacher  should  necessarily have been<br \/>\nappointed as  the  Headmaster  and  none  else.\t   He\talso<br \/>\ncontended  that\t transfer  of  4th  respondent\tfrom another<br \/>\nschool was vitiated as approval for such transfer  was\tmade<br \/>\non  the\t premise  that\the was being transferred to hold the<br \/>\npost of Headmaster.  The third contention  is  that  as\t the<br \/>\nvacancy of Headmaster arose before 2-8-1994, the post should<br \/>\nhave  been  filled  up\tin  accordance\twith  Rules  and the<br \/>\nprotection as minority school cannot be used to\t thwart\t the<br \/>\nlegitimate right of the seniormost teacher.<br \/>\n&#8220;Educational  Agency&#8221;  is defined under Section 2(2)<br \/>\nof the Act as &#8220;any person or body  of  persons\tpemitted  to<br \/>\nestabilish  and maintain any private school under this Act&#8221;.<br \/>\nChapter\t XIV  of  the  Kerala  Education  Rules\t contains  a<br \/>\nfasciculus  of\tRules  regarding  &#8221; Conditions of service of<br \/>\naided school teachers&#8221;. Rule 10 which falls under  the\tsaid<br \/>\nChapter\t provides  that where more than one school are under<br \/>\nthe same Educational Agency, a teacher from one such  school<br \/>\nmay   be  transferred  to  another  such  school  under\t one<br \/>\nEducational Agency may be  transferred\tto  a  schiik  under<br \/>\nanother Educational Agency with the previous approval of the<br \/>\nDEO,  and Rule 13 stipulates that his rank in the new School<br \/>\n&#8220;will be fixed next below the  juniormost  teacher  in\tthat<br \/>\nparticular  grade  in  that  school&#8221;.  The  minimum  service<br \/>\nqualification for appointment as Headmaster is\tprovided  in<br \/>\nRule 44A. As Rule 44(1) is important it is extreacted below:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;The  appointment  of  Headmasters  shall<br \/>\n\tordinarily be according to seniority from<br \/>\n\tthe    seniority    list   prepared   and<br \/>\n\tmaintained under clauses (a) and (b),  as<br \/>\n\tthe case may be, of Rule 34.  The Manager<br \/>\n\twill  appoint  the  Headmaster subject to<br \/>\n\tthe Rules laid down in\tthe  matter.\tA<br \/>\n\tteacher\t  if  he  is  aggrieved\t by  such<br \/>\n\tappointment will have the right of appeal<br \/>\n\tto the &#8220;Department.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>What happens if the management of  the\tschool\tdoes<br \/>\nnot conform  to\t the  above  rules?    Section 14 of the Act<br \/>\nenables the  Government\t to  take  over\t the  management  of<br \/>\nschools\t for  a\t period\t not  exceeding 5 years &#8220;whenever it<br \/>\nappears to the Government that\tthe  manager  of  any  aided<br \/>\nschool has neglected to perform any of the duties imposed by<br \/>\nor under  this\tAct  or the rules made thereunder&#8221;.  But the<br \/>\naforesaid action cannot be taken against a  minority  school<br \/>\nbecause\t sub-section (9) of Section 14 says that &#8220;nothing in<br \/>\nthis section shall apply to minority schools.&#8221;<br \/>\nIn the light of the scheme  of\tthe  Act  out  above<br \/>\nrelating  to appointment of Headmaster in a minority school,<br \/>\nwe have now to consider\t whether  the  DEO  can\t compel\t the<br \/>\nmanagement  to\tappoint\t the  appellant as Headmaster of the<br \/>\nschool.\t For answering the said question  we  have  to\tdeal<br \/>\nwith  the  first  contention  that the school could not have<br \/>\nclaimed any protection as a minority school before 2-8-1994,<br \/>\nthe date when Government declared the school as\t a  minority<br \/>\nschool.\t  The  contention, in other words, is that the above<br \/>\ndeclaration of the Government is only prospective.<br \/>\n&#8220;Minority School&#8221; is defined in Section 2(5) of\t the<br \/>\nAct as under :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;Minority  school  means  school of their<br \/>\n\tchoice established and\tadministered,  or<br \/>\n\tadministered,  by such minorities as have<br \/>\n\tthe right to do so under  clause  (1)  of<br \/>\n\tArticle 30 of the Constitution&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>Counsel for both sides conceded that is no provision<br \/>\nin the Act which enables the Government to declare a  school<br \/>\nas minority  school.\tIf so, a school which is otherwise a<br \/>\nminority school would continue to be so\t whether  Government<br \/>\ndeclared it  as\t such or not.  Declaration by the Government<br \/>\nis at best only a recognition of an existing fact.   Article<br \/>\n30(1) of the Constitution reads thus:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;All minorities, whether based on religion<br \/>\n\tor  language,  shall  have  the\t right\tto<br \/>\n\testablish   and\t  administer   educational<br \/>\n\tinstitutions of their choice.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>When   the  Government\tdeclared  the  school  as  a<br \/>\nminority school it has recognised a  factual  position\tthat<br \/>\nthe  school  was  established and is being administered by a<br \/>\nminority community.    The  declaration\t is  only  an\topen<br \/>\nacceptance  of\ta  legal  character which should necessarily<br \/>\nhave existed antecedent to such declaration.  Therefore,  we<br \/>\nare  unable to agree with the contention that the school can<br \/>\nclaim protection only after the Government declared it as  a<br \/>\nminority school on 2-8-1994.\n<\/p>\n<p>We  will  now  consider the next contention that the<br \/>\nmanagement of a minority school is also bound by Rule  44(1)<br \/>\nof  the\t Kerala Education Rules and hence the seniormost HSA<br \/>\nof the school should have been appointed as Headmaster.<br \/>\nA  Constitution\t Bench of seven judges of this Court<br \/>\nin Re Kerala Education Bill, 1957  (AIR\t 1958  SC  956)\t has<br \/>\nexamined  the  constitutional validity of the Bill which was<br \/>\nthe precursor to the Act when President of India had  sought<br \/>\nthe  advice  of\t the  Supreme Court under Article 143 of the<br \/>\nconstitution.  One of the propositions laid down by the said<br \/>\nConstitution Bench in the said decision is this:  The  right<br \/>\nguaranteed  under  Article 30(1) is a right that is absolute<br \/>\nand any law  or\t executive  direction  which  infringes\t the<br \/>\nsubstance of the right is void to be extent of infringement.<br \/>\nBut  the  absolute  character of the right will not preclude<br \/>\nmaking of regulations in the true interests of efficiency or<br \/>\ninstruction,  discipline,  health,   sanitation,   morality,<br \/>\npublic\torder  and  the\t like  as  such\t regulations are not<br \/>\nrestrictions on the substance of the right guaranteed by the<br \/>\nConstitution.\n<\/p>\n<p>The  aforesaid\tproposition  was approved by another<br \/>\nConstitution Bench of this Court  in  Sidhrajbhai  Sabbai  &amp;<br \/>\nors.  vs.   State  of  Gujarat &amp; anr.  (AIR 1963 SC 540) and<br \/>\nalso by a 9 Judge Bench of this Court in The  Ahmedabad\t st.<br \/>\nXaviers College Society &amp;  anr.\t etc.  vs.  State of Gujarat<br \/>\n&amp; anr.\t(1975 1 SCR 173).\n<\/p>\n<p>Thus the legal\tposition  adumbrated  in  Re  Kerala<br \/>\nEducation Bill (supra) remains unchanged now.<br \/>\nSelection  and appointment of Headmaster in a school<br \/>\n(or Principal of a  college)  are  of  prime  importance  in<br \/>\nadministration of  that educational institution.  Headmaster<br \/>\nis the key post in the running of the school.  He is the hub<br \/>\non which all the spokes of the school are  set\taround\twhom<br \/>\nthey rotate  to\t generate  result.   A school is personified<br \/>\nthrough its Headmaster and he is the focal  point  on  which<br \/>\noutsiders look\tat  the\t school.  A bad Headmaster can spoil<br \/>\nthe entire institution, an efficient and  honest  Headmaster<br \/>\ncan improve it by leaps and bounds.  The functional efficacy<br \/>\nof  a  school  very  much  depends  upon  the efficiency and<br \/>\ndedication of its Headmaster.  This prestine precept remains<br \/>\nunchanged  despite  many  changes  taking   place   in\t the<br \/>\nstructural patterns of education over the years.<br \/>\nHow  important is the post of Headmaster of a school<br \/>\nhas been pithily stated by a Full Bench of the\tKerala\tHigh<br \/>\nCourt in Aldo Maria Patroni vs.\t E.C.  Kesavan &amp; ors.  (1964<br \/>\nKerala law Times  791).\t Chief Justice M.S.  Menon has, in a<br \/>\nstyle which is inimitable, stated thus :<br \/>\n\t&#8220;The  post of the headmaster is of pivotal<br \/>\n\timportance  in\tthe  file  of  a   school.\n<\/p>\n<p>\tAround\thim  wheels the tone and temper of<br \/>\n\tthe  institution;  on  him   depends   the<br \/>\n\tcontinuity    of   its\t traditions,   the<br \/>\n\tmaintenance   of   discipline\tand    the<br \/>\n\tefficiency of  its teaching.  the right to<br \/>\n\tchoose the headmaster is perhaps the  most<br \/>\n\timportant facet of the right to administer<br \/>\n\ta  school,  and\t we  must  hold\t that  the<br \/>\n\timposition of any trammel thereon &#8211; except<br \/>\n\tto the extent of prescribing the requisite<br \/>\n\tqualifications and experience &#8211; cannot but<br \/>\n\tbe considered as a violation of the  right<br \/>\n\tguaranteed   by\t  Article   30(1)  of  the<br \/>\n\tConstitution.  To hold otherwise  will\tbe<br \/>\n\tto  make  the right &#8216;a teasing illusion, a<br \/>\n\tpromise of unreality&#8217;.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(p.794)<br \/>\nThe importance of the key role\twhich  a  Headmaster<br \/>\nplays  in  the school cannot be better delineated than that.<br \/>\nThe Nine Judge Bench in the Ahmedabad  St.  Xaviers  Society<br \/>\nCollege\t (supra)  has highlighted the importance of the role<br \/>\nof Principal of a college. In support of the  majority\tview<br \/>\nin that decision K.K. Mathew, J. has observed thus:<br \/>\n\t&#8220;It is upon the principal and teachers of<br \/>\n\ta  college that the tone and temper of an<br \/>\n\teducational institution depend.\t On  them<br \/>\n\twould\t depend\t  its\treputation,   the<br \/>\n\tmaintenance   of   discipline\tand   its<br \/>\n\tefficiency in  teaching.    The\t right to<br \/>\n\tchoose the  principal  and  to\thave  the<br \/>\n\tteaching  conducted by teachers appointed<br \/>\n\tby  the\t management  after   an\t  overall<br \/>\n\tassessment    of    their   outlook   and<br \/>\n\tphilosophy is perhaps the most\timportant<br \/>\n\tfacet  of  the\tright  to  administer  an<br \/>\n\teducational institution.&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(p.270)<br \/>\nH.R.  Khanna, J has adopted  a\tstill  broader\tview<br \/>\nthat  even  selection  of teachers is of great importance in<br \/>\nthe right to manage a school.\t Learned  Judge\t has  stated<br \/>\nthus:\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;The selection and appointment of teachers<br \/>\n\tfor  an\t educational institution is one of<br \/>\n\tthe essential ingredients of the right\tto<br \/>\n\tmanage\tan educational institution and the<br \/>\n\tminorities can plainly be not denied  such<br \/>\n\tright of selection and appointment without<br \/>\n\tinfringing Article 30(1).&#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(p.242)<br \/>\nKrishna Iyer,  J.    who dissented from the majority<br \/>\nview in <a href=\"\/doc\/1993702\/\">Gandhi Faizeam College, Shahappur vs.  University of<br \/>\nAgra &amp;<\/a> ant.  (1975 3 SCR 810), has, nevertheless, emphasised<br \/>\nthe importance of the post of the Principal in the following<br \/>\nwords :\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;An activist  principal\t is  an\t asset\tin<br \/>\n\tdischarging   hrese   duties   which   are<br \/>\n\tinextricably  interlaced   with\t  academic<br \/>\n\tfunctions.  The principal is an invaluable<br \/>\n\tinsider &#8211; the Management&#8217;s  own\t choice\t &#8211;<br \/>\n\tnot   an   outsider   answerable   to  the<br \/>\n\tVice-Chancellor. He brings into\t the  work<br \/>\n\tof  the\t Managing  Committee that intimate<br \/>\n\tacquaintance with  educational\toperations<br \/>\n\tand    that    necessary   expression\tof<br \/>\n\tstudent-teacher\t     aspirations       and<br \/>\n\tcomplatints which are so essential for the<br \/>\n\tminority  institution  to  achieve a happy<br \/>\n\tmarriage   between    individuality    and<br \/>\n\texcellence.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(p.825)<br \/>\nWhatever is said about the importance of the post of<br \/>\nPrincipal of a college vis-a-vis the administration  of\t the<br \/>\ninstitution would in pari materia apply to the Headmaster of<br \/>\na school with equal force.\n<\/p>\n<p>If  management\tof the school is not given very wide<br \/>\nfreedom to choose the personnel for holding such a key post,<br \/>\nsubject\t  of   course\tto   the   restrictions\t   regarding<br \/>\nqualifications\tto  be prescribed by the State, the right to<br \/>\nadminister the school would get much diminished.<br \/>\nAppellant  in  this  case  adopted  an\t alternative<br \/>\ncontention  that  the vacancy of Headmaster should have been<br \/>\nfilled up on 1-6-1991 the date on which the  vacancy  arose.<br \/>\nRule 45C (Chapter XIV)of the Kerala Education Rules provides<br \/>\nfor  temporary\tpromotion  as  Headmaster in the contingency<br \/>\nwhen a qualified teacher is not available to be promoted  in<br \/>\naccordance with\t the  Rules.\tIn such contingency the Rule<br \/>\nsays  that  the\t appointing  authority\t&#8220;shall\tpromote\t the<br \/>\nseniormost teacher on the staff of the school or the schools<br \/>\nunder the Educational Agency, as Headmaster, temporarily,&#8221; A<br \/>\nDivision  Bench\t of the Kerala High Court has taken the view<br \/>\nthat even in a minority\t school\t appointment  of  Headmaster<br \/>\nshall  be  with\t reference  to\tthe date of vacancy arose on<br \/>\n2-5-1987 and none in that school was qualified\tand  so\t the<br \/>\nmanagement  of\tthat school brought one teacher from outside<br \/>\nand appointed  him  as\tHeadmaster.    The  Division   Bench<br \/>\nthereupon  held\t that &#8220;the management is bound to find out a<br \/>\nqualified teacher from among the members of its staff to  be<br \/>\nposted as Headmaster of the school in the vacancy that arose<br \/>\non 2nd May 1987&#8221;.\n<\/p>\n<p>If  the\t said  observations   were   meant   for   a<br \/>\nnon-minority  school,  we  would  not  have  considered\t its<br \/>\nimplications here.  But as the observations are meant for  a<br \/>\nminority  school  in  that case we may state at once that we<br \/>\nare unable to concur with it.  The management of a  minority<br \/>\nschool\tis  free  to find out a qualified person either from<br \/>\nthe staff of the same school or from outside to fill up\t the<br \/>\nvacancy.   We  may  point  out,\t in  this  context, that the<br \/>\nDivision Bench in Henry Gomes&#8217;s case (supra) has quoted with<br \/>\napproval  the  following  observation  of  another   earlier<br \/>\nDivision  Bench\t decision  of the same High Court in Manager<br \/>\nCorporate E.  Agency vs.  State of Kerala (1990 2 Kerala Law<br \/>\nTimes 240) &#8221;\n<\/p>\n<p>\t&#8220;The right to appoint the Headmaster of a<br \/>\n\tschool or the Principal of a college,  is<br \/>\n\tone    of   prime   importance\t in   the<br \/>\n\tadministration of the institution.    The<br \/>\n\tright  of  the\tminority to administer an<br \/>\n\teducational  institution  of  its  choice<br \/>\n\trequires the presence of a person in whom<br \/>\n\tthey can  repose  confidence.\t Who will<br \/>\n\tcarry out their directions, and\t to  whom<br \/>\n\tthey  can  look\t forward  to maintain the<br \/>\n\ttraditions, discipline and the efficiency<br \/>\n\tof the teaching.  When once  the  pivotal<br \/>\n\tposition of the Headmaster is recognised,<br \/>\n\tit  has\t to  be\t held  that  the right to<br \/>\n\tappoint\t a  person  of\tits   choice   as<br \/>\n\tHeadmaster  is of paramount importance to<br \/>\n\tthe minority, any interference with which<br \/>\n\t(otherwise    than     by     prescribing<br \/>\n\tqualifications\t and   experience)   will<br \/>\n\tdenude the right of administration of  is<br \/>\n\tcontent,   reducing   it  to  mere  husk,<br \/>\n\twithout the grain.  Such an inroad cannot<br \/>\n\tbe saved as regulation\twhich  the  State<br \/>\n\tmight impose for furthering the standards<br \/>\n\tof education.\n<\/p>\n<p>\t(emphasis supplied)<br \/>\nApproval of the above observations of the  earlier  Division<br \/>\nBench  decision\t of the same court does not go in consonance<br \/>\nwith the direction issued  in  Henry  Gomez  case  that\t the<br \/>\nmanagement  is\tbound  to  find out a qualified teacher from<br \/>\namong the members of its staff to be posted as headmaster of<br \/>\nthe school.\n<\/p>\n<p>Shri R.F.      Nariman,\t  learned   senior   counsel<br \/>\ncontended, alternatively, that if the management is  anxious<br \/>\nto find out the most qualified person to fill up the post of<br \/>\nHeadmaster  the\t management  should  have advertised for the<br \/>\npost inviting  applications  from  qualified  persons.\t  To<br \/>\nbutteress  up  the said argument learned counsel cited a two<br \/>\nJudge Bench decision of this  Court  in\t <a href=\"\/doc\/521416\/\">Shainda  Hasan\t vs.<br \/>\nState of Uttar\tPradesh\t &amp;  ors.<\/a>  (1990 2 SCR 699).  In that<br \/>\ncase the management of a college was  selected\tby  relaxing<br \/>\nthe   qualifications   the  University\tdeclined  to  accord<br \/>\napproval thereto.   When  appellant  approached\t this  court<br \/>\nlearned\t judges\t suggested  that  the  University  might not<br \/>\ninterfere with the selection and appointment under the facts<br \/>\nof that case.  But no legal proposition has been  laid\tdown<br \/>\nthat   selection  process  must\t be  through  advertisement.<br \/>\nAccording to us, it is for the management  of  the  minority<br \/>\neducational institution to choose the modality for selecting<br \/>\nthe qualified persons for appointment.<br \/>\nThus  the  management&#8217;s\t right to choose a qualified<br \/>\nperson as the Headmaster of the school is well insulated  by<br \/>\nthe  protective\t cover\tof Article 30(1) of the Constitution<br \/>\nand it cannot be chiselled out through any  legislative\t act<br \/>\nor  executive  rule  except for fixing up the qualifications<br \/>\nand conditions of service for the post. Any  such  statutory<br \/>\nor  executive  fiat  would  be\tviolative of the fundamental<br \/>\nright enshrined in the aforesaid Article and would hence  be<br \/>\nvoid.\n<\/p>\n<p>In the present case, nobody  has  alleged  that\t 4th<br \/>\nrespondent  does  not  possess the qualifications prescribed<br \/>\nfor the post of\t Headmaster.\tIf  that  is  the  position,<br \/>\nmanagement  has\t the right and freedom to appoint him as the<br \/>\nHeadmaster of the school whether it is by brining  him\tdown<br \/>\nfrom another  school  or  even\tfrom  outside the State.  We<br \/>\ntherefore concur with the conclusion of the  Division  Bench<br \/>\nof the High Court in the impugned Judgment and dismiss these<br \/>\nappeals.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Supreme Court of India N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998 Author: Thomas. Bench: S. Saghir Ahmad, K.T. Thomas PETITIONER: N. AMMAD Vs. RESPONDENT: THE MANAGER, EMJAY HIGH SCHOOL &amp; ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 07\/09\/1998 BENCH: S. SAGHIR AHMAD, K.T. THOMAS ACT: HEADNOTE: JUDGMENT: J U D G [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[30],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-123234","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-supreme-court-of-india"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v27.3 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"16 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998\",\"datePublished\":\"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\"},\"wordCount\":3101,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"Supreme Court of India\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\",\"name\":\"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"16 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998","datePublished":"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998"},"wordCount":3101,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["Supreme Court of India"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998","name":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; ... on 7 September, 1998 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court &amp; High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"1998-09-06T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2018-09-04T15:29:06+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/n-ammad-vs-the-manager-emjay-high-school-on-7-september-1998#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"N. Ammad vs The Manager, Emjay High School &amp; &#8230; on 7 September, 1998"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123234","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=123234"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/123234\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=123234"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=123234"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=123234"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}