Last Updated on January 11, 2026 by Satish Mishra

You can appeal an order from the Education Tribunal Punjab to the Punjab and Haryana High Court within 60 days on a “question of law,” typically via a Writ Petition (Article 226) (CWP) for quashing orders, challenging dismissal/termination, or seeking reinstatement, with High Court cases frequently focusing on natural justice, proper procedure, and whether terminations were penal or performance-based, often upholding Tribunal orders if reasoned, but sometimes intervening for procedural flaws.

Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the decision of Punjab Educationl Tribunal.

Grounds for Appeal

Appeals to the High Court usually involve points of law, such as:

Procedural Irregularities: Violation of principles of natural justice (e.g., lack of proper notice or opportunity to be heard).
Jurisdictional Issues: Tribunal exceeding its powers (e.g., directing payment beyond its scope).
Misinterpretation of Law: Tribunal misapplying service rules or statutory provisions.
Unreasoned/Unjust Orders: Tribunal’s decision lacking proper reasoning or being perverse.

Process

File a Writ Petition: You file a Civil Writ Petition (CWP) under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Punjab & Haryana High Court.
Time Limit: Generally, you have 60 days from the date of the Tribunal’s order’s communication to file the appeal.
Legal Representation: An advocate is essential to draft the petition and argue the case.

Key Aspects from Court Decisions

Natural Justice: High Courts often quash Tribunal orders if inquiries were biased or without due process.
Performance vs. Penalty: Courts differentiate between non-satisfactory performance (not penal, no inquiry needed) and penal termination (requires inquiry).
Challenging Tribunal Findings: While High Courts respect Tribunal findings, they intervene if the Tribunal’s reasoning is flawed or based on assumptions rather than evidence.

Examples of High Court Cases

Cases like Tarun Ghai vs. Educational Tribunal involved appeals against dismissals, where the Court upheld the Tribunal’s decision.
Other cases challenge termination orders or seek reinstatement, focusing on the legal grounds for the original dismissal.

The petitioner argued that the dismissal of the petitioner was illegal because it was based merely on the assumption that the petitioner was a whistle-blower as his name had incidentally appeared in an article highlighting the plight of the Lecturers.The court, however, rejected this argument, holding that approaching the press and making a statement was not the appropriate remedy for redressal of his grievances. Appealingagainst the decision of the disciplinary authority and the Educational Tribunal, Punjab, the court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, TarunGhai, and dismissed the writ petition.

On 13^th July 2012, in a case before Justice Rajesh Bindal’s Bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, appealing against the decision of the disciplinary authority and the Educational Tribunal, Punjab, the court upheld the dismissal of the petitioner, Tarun Ghai, and dismissed the writ petition.

Facts of the Case

The petitioner was working as a Political Science Lecturer in Swami Ganga Giri Janta Girls College, Raikot (Ludhiana).On 8^th April 2010, a reference was made to the petitioner in a news article on the plight of Lecturers working on un-aided posts in aided Colleges in Punjab. He was charge sheeted on 27^th May 2010, following which he wrote a letter regretting his mistake. Nonetheless, he was dismissed from service by the disciplinary authority on 16^th May 2011. Even the appeal filed by him against the order of dismissal was dismissed by Education Tribunal, Punjab, aggrieved by which, he then appealed to the High Court.

Issues Examined by the Court

The court looked into [I] Legality of the dismissal and [II] Alleged Biasness in the Enquiry Proceedings while deciding the case.

Also Read- Punjab Educational Tribunal Mohali Legal Updates

[I] Legality of the dismissal

The counsel for the petitioner argued that the dismissal of the petitioner was illegal because it was based merely on the assumption that the petitioner was a whistle-blower as his name had incidentally appeared in an article highlighting the plight of the Lecturers.The court, however, rejected this argument, holding that approaching the press and making a statement was not the appropriate remedy for redressal of his grievances. Moreover, the court found that the petitioner was not dismissed because of the news article.

It was observed that there were number of charges against the petitioner, pertaining to misappropriation of money collected from the students for the purpose of organizing parties, misbehaving with the Principal and provoking the employees against the management. These allegations were duly proved by the Enquiry Officer’s investigation and the statements of the witnesses produced by the management.

Furthermore, the apology submitted by the petitioner did not parallel his unapologetic, adamant and egoistic behaviour during the enquiry proceedings as well as in the Court. In light of the same, the Court observing that such an employee spoils the entire working atmosphere in an institute, ruled that the dismissal was justified.

Also Read- Latest Judgments of Punjab Education Tribunal

[II] Alleged Biasness in the Enquiry Proceedings

The court also rejected the claim of the petitioner of biasness in the proceedings. The counsel had submitted that the petitioner was condemned unheard.It was claimed that the Enquiry officer’s actions were partial, arbitrary and unconstitutional and that he was proceeding on the dictates of the management. It was also pointed out that the petitioner was not supplied the documents which would enable him to effectively cross-examine the witnesses produced by the management.

In response to these allegations the court noted that the petitioner, himself, was not conducting himself appropriately. He was teaching law to the Enquiry Officer as to what his duty was and in what manner he was required to proceed, required the Enquiry Officer to pass speaking orders at interim stage and even stated that the manner in which the enquiry was being conducted, it will not be useful to appear before him. Furthermore, in response to being intimated about the adjournment due to his absence from the enquiry, he proceeded to level allegations of bias against the enquiry officer, to the President of the Management Committee. It was also noted that the petitioner was granted a defence assistant on his request, thus indicating the impartial nature of the enquiry. In consideration of the foregoing, the court held that the Enquiry Proceedings were just and unbiased.

Also Read- Latest recent Judgments of High Court related to Education Tribunal Punjab

Legal Provisions

Article 226, The Constitution of India, 1949

Power of High Courts to issue certain writs

Notwithstanding anything in Article 32 every High Court shall have powers, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercise jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibitions, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose
The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories
Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1), without
furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order; and
giving such party an opportunity of being heard, makes an application to the High Court for the vacation of such order and furnishes a copy of such application to the party in whose favour such order has been made or the counsel of such party, the High Court shall dispose of the application within a period of two weeks from the date on which it is received or from the date on which the copy of such application is so furnished, whichever is later, or where the High Court is closed on the last day of that period, before the expiry of the next day afterwards on which the High Court is open; and if the application is not so disposed of, the interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or, as the case may be, the expiry of the aid next day, stand vacated
The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme court by clause (2) of Article 32

Order Passed

The court, averring that the dismissal of the petioner was just and that the Enquiry proceedings were unbiased, dismissed the writ petitioner and upheld the judgement given by the Education Tribunal, Punjab.

Also Read– Punjab Education Tribunal Latest Legal Update

In essence, if you believe the Punjab Education Tribunal made a significant error of law, you can challenge it in the Punjab & Haryana High Court through a Writ Petition within the stipulated time frame.

For case specific advice on education tribunal matters related to removal from service universities and aided colleges, one may contact top/best expert education tribunal Lawyers in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Zirakpur Derabassi Kharar Mullanpur Baltana.

More on 99888-17966.