1 wp 5219.05
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5219 OF 2005
Subhodh S/o Nagnathrao Suryawanshi,
Age : 52 Years, Occu. : Service,
R/o Nehru Junior College,
Savkheda, Tq. Gangapur,
Dist. Aurangabad. .. Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
(Through its Secretary,
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32).
2. The Director of Education,
MS Pune.
3. The Deputy Director of Education,
Aurangabad.
4. Marathwada Banjara Seva Santh
(Through Its President :
Shri Ramsingh Shankarsingh Chavan
Aged 55 Years, Occu. : Agril.,
R/o Naik Nagar, Aurangabad) .. Respondents
Shri U. R. Awate, Advocate h/f Shri S. B. Talekar, Advocate for
the Petitioner.
Shri M. B. Bharaswadkar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
The Respondent No. 4 is served.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/10/2016 00:34:51 :::
2 wp 5219.05
DATE : 21ST OCTOBER, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.) :-
. Mr. Awate, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that, the petitioner was working with the respondent No. 4/college. The recognition of the said college was withdrawn on 29.06.1996. The petitioner was paid salary till 29.06.1996. The petitioner preferred many representations for absorbing him in other institution. The petitioner filed writ petition. This Court directed the respondents to include the name of the present petitioner in the wait list of the teachers of the de-recognized junior college and to absorb in the recognized junior college as and when vacancy is available for the teachers. The petitioner was allowed to join only in November 2003, pursuant to the order of absorption dated 18.10.2003. According to the learned counsel, the other lecturers who were juniors to the petitioner were absorbed prior in point of time. The respondents did not follow the seniority. The respondents be directed to pay salary to the petitioner from 1996 till absorption and to grant all other consequential benefits.
2. The learned Assistant Government pleader states that, the college was de-recognized, as such the petitioner's services stood terminated on de-recognition of the college. After holding enquiry, it was found that, the petitioner was not responsible for ::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/10/2016 00:34:51 ::: 3 wp 5219.05 the de-recognition of the college. Thereafter has been absorbed vide order passed in October 2013. No error has been committed by respondents.
3. We have considered the submissions canvassed by learned counsel for respective parties.
4. The junior college where the petitioner was working stood de-recognized. As such, the petitioner's services stood terminated due to retrenchment. In the present case, Rule 25 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Condition of Service) Rules would apply. No doubt, the respondents are required to consider the cause for de-recognition and if the employee is not responsible for de-recognition of the said college, then the employee can be absorbed in other recognized college. Upon enquiry, it was found that, employees were not responsible for de-recognition of the college and as such steps were taken to absorb the petitioner. In view of the relevant rules the petitioner is not entitled for the salary for the period, the petitioner is terminated on account of retrenchment till his absorption, as the same is under Rule 25-A of the M. E. P. S. Rules. The fact would have been different, if the petitioner would have been retrenched under Rule 26 of the M. E. P. S. Rules.
5. In view of that, request of the petitioner for payment of ::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/10/2016 00:34:51 ::: 4 wp 5219.05 salary for the said period cannot be accepted. However, the services from the date of derecognition of the junior college, where the petitioner was working till his absorption shall be considered for the purpose of continuity in service and other benefits. The petitioner may accordingly apply for pay fixation. The authorities shall consider the same in the light of the judgment passed in the present petition.
Rule accordingly made absolute in above terms.
Sd/- Sd/-
[ K. L. WADANE, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ]
bsb/Oct. 16
::: Uploaded on - 25/10/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 26/10/2016 00:34:51 :::