Authority: High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar

Order Date: 5 August 2026

Case Overview

  • Parties: Petitioners – Showkat Yousuf Shah & Ors.; Respondents – Union of India and Ors. (represented by Deputy Solicitor General Mr. Tahir Majid Shamsi).
  • Nature of Proceeding: Writ Petition (WP (C) No. 1911/2019, CM Nos. 3660/2019, 7815/2024, 3575/2026) filed under Article 226 seeking continuation in service and a writ of mandamus for payment of salary as per CBSE pay scales (₹9,300‑34,800 + GP ₹4,200).
  • Background Facts: Petitioners were appointed as PRT/TGT/PGT teachers at Army Goodwill School, Wayne, Kupwara between 2013‑2017. They claim substantive posts and entitlement to CBSE pay scales. After seeking fixation of pay, the school management allegedly initiated fresh recruitment, creating apprehension of illegal termination.
  • Preliminary Objection: Respondents argued the school is neither a "Government Department" nor a "Government‑aided Institution" but a self‑financed institution under Operation Sadbhavana, thus outside the ambit of Article 226.
  • Statutory Framework: The school operates under SOPs framed by the Army Goodwill Education Society (registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860). Relevant SOP paragraphs (80,81,82,85,86,87,102) govern recruitment, pay, and termination. The school receives no annual government aid; funding is self‑generated, NGO/corporate support, and limited Operation Sadbhavana assistance.
  • Judicial Precedents Cited by Petitioners:

1. Bhola Nath v. State of Jharkhand (2026 SCC OnLine SC 129) – regularisation of contractual employees on sanctioned posts.

2. Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Pensioners Welfare Association v. State of Himachal Pradesh (2024) 14 SCC 697 – maintainability where the State has deep control.

  • Judicial Precedents Cited by Respondents: Army Welfare Education Society v. Sunil Kumar Sharma (2024) 16 SCC 598 – examined whether AWES is a "State" under Article 12 and the scope of writ jurisdiction over private educational institutions.
  • Supreme Court Analysis (as discussed in the judgment):
  • Bhola Nath is distinguishable because the present case involves contractual terms in SOPs, not regular sanctioned posts.
  • Kangra is inapplicable as there is no deep and pervasive State control over the school.
  • Army Welfare Education Society held that AWES is a private unaided society; although education is a public function, the employer‑employee relationship is private. Service disputes lacking a public law element are not amenable to Article 226. The doctrine of legitimate expectation applies only to public law contexts, not private contracts.
  • Court’s Reasoning: The school is a self‑financed institution, not a government department or aided body, and its service conditions are governed solely by contractual SOP provisions, not statutory service rules. CBSE affiliation Bye‑Laws lack statutory force. Hence, the dispute is a private contract matter, devoid of a public law element, making the writ petition non‑maintainable.

Final Outcome

  • The preliminary objection on maintainability is upheld.
  • The writ petition is declared non‑maintainable and dismissed.
  • Any interim directions existing as of the order date are vacated.
  • Pending applications, if any, are disposed of.

Topics: Court Proceedings, Education Law