'School Management Justified In Adopting Zero-Tolerance Approach Where Teacher’s Conduct Raises Serious Concerns': Bombay HC

Mumbai, Jan 30: Holding that a school management is justified in adopting a zero-tolerance approach where a teacher’s conduct raises serious concerns, the Bombay High Court has refused to interfere with the termination of a probationary assistant teacher accused of sending “romantic messages” to students on WhatsApp.

Contact with students sufficient ground

The court observed that even without examining the actual content of the messages, the very act of a teacher in his 30s being in contact with students with a “serious age gap” was sufficient for the management to discontinue his probation.

Tribunal order upheld

Justice Somasekhar Sundaresan dismissed a petition filed by the teacher challenging an August 2024 order of the Mumbai School Tribunal, which had upheld his termination by a school in Raigad district.

“The opinion that his probation must not be continued is not at all based on the work and performance… On the contrary, what is apparent is that the termination is based on discomfort with behaviour outside the classroom,” the court observed.

It added that the issue was “serious”, as complaints had been received from parents and members of the local community regarding a teacher in his 30s being in touch with students through “romantic messages” on WhatsApp.

No finding on message content

Clarifying the scope of its findings, the court said, “Nothing in the judgment attaches stigma to the content of messaging,” noting that no WhatsApp chats were produced on record.

However, Justice Sundaresan held that, “to my mind, the fact that a teacher had been texting a student, with a serious age gap, poses adequate grounds for the management being dissatisfied with the probationer-petitioner.”

Written apology noted

The court noted that the teacher had issued a written apology to the school principal on the very day the messaging came to light, and had “not retracted his written confirmation and apology on the ground of coercion”.

Background of the case

The petitioner was appointed as a probationary assistant teacher (Shikshan Sevak) on February 29, 2020, for a period of three years. In December 2022, the school received complaints from parents alleging inappropriate messaging with certain girl students.

The court recorded that “local unrest is said to have occurred with a mob having gathered over the matter, necessitating the principal having to intercede and save the petitioner”.

His probation was terminated on January 31, 2023, with effect from February 1, after the school paid him salary in lieu of one month’s notice.

Court rejects plea of permanency

The teacher’s advocate, Sugandh Deshmukh, contended that since the probationary period was to end in February 2023, the petitioner had effectively become a permanent employee, and therefore termination could only follow a full-fledged inquiry.

Rejecting this, the court held that the management was “entitled to adopt a zero-tolerance policy” and had sufficient material to form a reasonable opinion that the petitioner’s conduct was “not satisfactory behaviour”.

Also Watch:

Termination within statutory powers

The court concluded that the termination was effected “without stigma being attached” and fell squarely within the school’s statutory powers to terminate a probationer, and dismissed the petition.

To get details on exclusive and budget-friendly property deals in Mumbai & surrounding regions, do visit: https://budgetproperties.in/