Play store
The High Court has ruled that a private college cannot dismiss a teacher solely on the basis of a governing body decision without prior approval from the education board’s Appeal and Arbitration Committee.
The court also held that forming an investigation committee solely on the verbal or telephone instruction of a governing body chairperson, bypassing the required legal procedure, is unlawful.
The ruling came in a case involving Abdul Munsur, an associate professor of mathematics at Gachihata College in Kishoreganj’s Katiadi.
A High Court bench of Justice Md Sohrawardy and Justice Dihidar Masum Kabir delivered the judgment on July 9, with the full verdict published recently.
The case arose from allegations of misconduct against Munsur in 2014. Following disciplinary proceedings, the college governing body decided to dismiss him in January 2015 and made the dismissal effective from February 1.
The decision was later sent to the Dhaka Education Board for approval, but its Appeal and Arbitration Committee rejected it and ordered his reinstatement with arrears of salary and allowances.
In its full judgment, the High Court said the prescribed disciplinary procedure for teachers of recognised private colleges must be followed strictly. An accused teacher must be given at least seven days to explain the allegations and an opportunity for a personal hearing.
The court said any investigation committee must be formed through a formal resolution at a properly convened governing body meeting. A chairperson’s verbal or telephone instruction cannot replace such a resolution.
The court also found inconsistencies in the dates of the alleged incident and procedural shortcomings in the investigation, including insufficient time for the teacher to defend himself.
It observed that a governing body can only recommend dismissal; the dismissal cannot take effect before approval from the education board’s Appeal and Arbitration Committee. Such approval cannot be treated as a mere formality.
As Munsur reached retirement age while the case was pending, the court said reinstatement was no longer possible. However, he remains entitled to his outstanding salary, employment benefits and applicable pension benefits up to his date of retirement.