wp3024.08.J.odt 1/6
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3024 OF 2008
Purushottam Parsharam Masurkar
R/o Zadgaon, Tq. Sakoli,
Dist. Bhandara. ....... PETITIONER
...V E R S U S...
1]
Sant Narhari Shikshan Sanstha,
through its Secretary,
Sakoli, Dist. Bhandara.
2] Shri A.P. Domale,
Head Master, Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru
Vidyalaya, Sangadi, Tq. Sakoli,
Dist. Bhandara.
3] Shri B.M. Gohane
Head Master Natrayanrao Domale
Vidyalaya, Kumhali, Tq. Sakoli,
Dist. Bhandara.
4] Shri M.T. Landge,
Head Master, Sarswati Vidyalaya,
Barva, Tq. Lakhandur, Dist. Bhandara.
5] The Education Officer (Sec.),
Zilla Parishad, Bhandara. ....... RESPONDENTS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Rohit Vaidya, Advocate h/f Shri Anand Parchure,
Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri S.R. Charpe, Advocate for Respondent No.1.
Mrs. Geeta Tiwari, AGP for Respondent No.5.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 :::
wp3024.08.J.odt 2/6
CORAM: R.K. DESHPANDE, J.
th OCTOBER, 2016.
DATE: 15
ORAL JUDGMENT
1] The School Tribunal has dismissed Appeal
No.STC-103 of 1998 filed by the petitioner under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 challenging the promotions of the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 to the post of Head Master of the School in supersession of his claim. Hence, the original appellant is before this Court challenging the order of the School Tribunal.
2] The factual position not in dispute is as under:
The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher initially on 25.06.1990 on temporary basis and then he was confirmed in service w.e.f. 21.06.1993. At the time of his initial appointment on temporary basis on 25.06.1990, he was qualified as B.A. B.Ed. and was a trained graduate teacher. The respondent No.2 was initially appointed on temporary basis on 27.06.1988 and was confirmed on the post on 21.06.1993. Though, he was possessing the qualification of graduation at the time of his initial ::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 ::: wp3024.08.J.odt 3/6 appointment in the year 1988, he acquired training qualification of B.Ed. on 13.08.1993. The respondent No.3-B.M. Gohane was initially appointed on temporary basis on 22.06.1987 and was confirmed in service on 20.06.1994. Though, at the time of his initial appointment, he was possessing the qualification of B.A., he acquired the training qualification of B.Ed. in the year 1994.
The respondent No.4-M.T. Landge was initially appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 25.06.1990, when he was possessing the qualification of B.A. He acquired the training qualification of B.Ed.
in the year 1991 and was confirmed in service on 21.06.1993.
The seniority of all these employees including the petitioner has been counted from the date of their regular appointment on the post as an Assistant Teacher. The seniority list of the petitioner, the respondent No.2-A.P. Domale and the respondent No.4-M.T.
Landge is counted w.e.f. 21.06.1993, whereas the seniority of the respondent No.3-B.M. Gohane is counted from 20.06.1994.
3] The respondent No.2 was promoted as Head Master on 25.12.1995, the respondent No.3 was promoted as Head Master on 26.06.1995 and the respondent No.4-M.T. Landge was lastly promoted as Head Master on 21.01.1997. The appeal challenging all these promotions was filed on 17.08.1998.
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 ::: wp3024.08.J.odt 4/6
4] Except the statement in para 6 of the memo of appeal
that the appellant approached the respondent No.5-Education Officer (Sec.), Zilla Parishad, Bhandara to decide the seniority as per Rule 12 read with Schedule-F of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 by sending letters dated 16.10.1997, 28.11.1997, 04.03.1998, 05.03.1998, 23.03.1998, 03.06.1998 and 08.06.1998, there is no explanation furnished for the delay and laches in approaching the School Tribunal to challenge such promotions. Obviously, the representations to the Education Officer were for making corrections in the seniority list and the Education Officer had no jurisdiction to set aside the order of supersession in the matter of promotion. Unless the challenge was raised to the orders of promotion of the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4 within a reasonable time, no fault can be found with the view taken by the School Tribunal in dismissing the appeal. The rights were accrued in favour of the respondent Nos.2, 3 and 4.
5] In view of above, no interference is called for.
The writ petition is dismissed.
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 :::wp3024.08.J.odt 5/6 Civil Application (W) No.2289/2016:
By this civil application the petitioner wanted to bring on record certain documents which pertained to the seniority list of 2014-2015 and also the certificate of one Shri P.P. Domle on record. Shri P.P. Domle was not party to the appeal preferred before the School Tribunal. In view of this, if the documents produced along with the application give rise to the subsequent cause of action for preferring an appeal challenging the promotion of Shri P.P. Domle, it shall be open for the petitioner to raise such a grievance in the appropriate forum.
Civil application stands disposed of.
JUDGE
NSN
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 :::
wp3024.08.J.odt 6/6
C E R T I F I C A T E
"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of original signed Judgment."
Uploaded by : Uploaded on : 20.10.2016.
N.S. Nikhare, P.A.
::: Uploaded on - 20/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 21/10/2016 00:22:06 :::