The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the order dated 30.04.2021 passed by respondent No.2 and praying to direct respondent No.2 to grant approval to the petitioner for the post of Headmaster of Dr. Zakir Hussain High School.
The Court observed that the management cannot be permitted to allow such an employee to return as and when he desires, on the pleading that it is a minority institution.
Brief Facts:
The petitioner claims that he opted for voluntary retirement, purportedly under a threat from the Management, by submitting an application on 15.05.2019. On 31.07.2019, he was relieved from service in terms of his application seeking voluntary retirement. He returned to the Management in January 2021 praying for reinstatement. The Management obliged by reinstating him w.e.f. 04.01.2021. The proposal for his reinstatement was forwarded to the Education Officer for approval along with the representation of the Management dated 22.02.2021. By the impugned order dated 30.04.2021, the Education Officer declined to grant approval for the reinstatement of the petitioner.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The Learned Counsel for the petitioner contended that though the petitioner was relieved on 31.07.2019, the Management voluntarily reinstated him on 04.01.2021. This arrangement is between the petitioner and the Management. If the Management is reinstating the petitioner, the Education Officer cannot have any objection.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The Learned Counsel for the respondent contended that after the petitioner opted for voluntary retirement, all his retiral benefits were cleared by the Department. He was paid the gratuity amount of Rs.7,93,100/-, commutation amount of Rs.15,17,215/- and he has been receiving pension on a month-to-month basis @ Rs 36,050/-. Once a person opts for voluntary retirement, and avails all the benefits payable as per the service conditions, without a demur, a private arrangement between the Management and such a candidate, to again bring him back in employment and put him on the post of Head Master, is without the sanction of the Government.
Observations of the Court
The Court observed that the conduct of the petitioner, after his retirement, in accepting the gratuity amount, in opting for commutation of a portion of the pension and receiving Rs.15,17,215/- in lieu thereof and receiving his monthly pension without any demur or complaint, is indicative of the fact that the petitioner had come to terms with his retirement and had no grievance about it. The Education Department of the State Government is not at fault for refusing approval.
Further, the Court remarked that the management cannot be permitted to allow such an employee to return as and when he desires and the private Management, on the pleading that it is a minority institution.
The decision of the Court:
The Bombay High Court, dismissing the petition, held that the impugned order could not be termed as being perverse or erroneous.
Case Title: Mohammed Mussaviruddin Mohammed Naziruddin vs The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
Coram: Hon’ble Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and Hon’ble Justice Sanjay A. Deshmukh
Case no.: WRIT PETITION NO. 6452 OF 2021
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Vivek Dhage
Advocate for the Respondent No.1: Mr. P. S. Patil
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :