Bombay High Court
Gujrati Rashtriya Kelwani Mandal ... vs Ku. Deepali Shantilal Dakhne And 3 ... on 2 August, 2016
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
1 jg.wp1165.09.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
: NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 1165 OF 2009
(1) Gujrati Rashtriya Kelwani Mandal
Through Secretary, Rail Toli, Gondia.
(2) The Gujrati National High School
through its Head Master/Secretary,
School Committee, Rail Toli, Gondia. ... Petitioners
// VERSUS //
(1) Ku. Deepali Shantilal Dakhne
A/a 37 Yrs., Occ. Service,
R/o Near Sai Mandir, Civil Lines,
Gondia.
(2) The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Gondia.
(3) Manohar S/o Narayan Tirpude,
Age : Adult, Occ. Librarian,
R/o Punatoli, Gondia.
(4) The Presiding Officer,
School Tribunal, Nagpur. ... Respondents
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri A. N. Vastani, Advocate for the petitioners
Shri H. V. Thakur, Advocate for the respondent no. 1
Shri A. M. Kadukar, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no. 2 and 4
Shir B. G. Kulkarni, Advocate for the respondent no. 3
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.
DATE : 2-8-2016.
ORAL ORDER
This writ petition takes exception to the judgment of the School
Tribunal, Nagpur whereby the appeal filed by the respondent no. 1 challenging
2 jg.wp1165.09.odt
the notice of termination dated 30-5-1997 has been allowed and order of
reinstatement with continuity in service along with 50% back wages has been
directed.
2. It is the case of the respondent no. 1 that pursuant to advertisement
published by the petitioner-management, she had applied for being appointed on
the post of Part Time Librarian. Order of appointment dated 3-7-1996 came to
be issued to her. It is further case of the respondent no. 1 that though her
appointment was on a clear and vacant post and she was duly qualified, the
order of appointment was issued for a period of one year. It was her further case
that despite her service being satisfactory, a notice to terminate her services came
to be issued on 30-5-1997. This was followed by relieving order dated 3-7-1997.
Being aggrieved, the respondent no. 1 filed an appeal challenging the action of
termination before the School Tribunal.
3. The respondents opposed the aforesaid appeal by filing their
written statement. According to them, the appointment of the respondent no. 1
was of a temporary nature. Her services were not satisfactory and she was issued
various communications informing her about the same. It was the further stand
taken in the written statement that the action of terminating her services was in
accordance with law and hence, the management was justified in terminating her
services.
The respondent no. 3 was appointed after the services of the respondent
3 jg.wp1165.09.odt
no. 1 were terminated and was also joined as a party in the said appeal. The
learned Presiding Officer, after hearing of the concerned parties, proceeded to
hold that the notice of termination dated 30-5-1997 was illegal. School Tribunal
did not accept the stand of the management that the services of the respondent
no. 1 were not satisfactory. It found that no record was kept of the services
discharged by the respondent no. 1 as per the provisions of Rule 15(6) of the
Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation
Rules, 1981. Hence by the impugned judgment, the appeal came to be allowed
and the respondent no. 1 was directed to reinstate with continuity in service and
50% back wages.
4. The arguments of the learned counsel for the parties were heard.
When the judgment was to be rendered, at that stage, it was submitted on behalf
of the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the respondent no. 3 that
considering the passage of almost 19 years from the order of termination and
the fact that the respondent no. 3 who was appointed on the post held by
the respondent no. 1 having been confirmed in service, this Court may consider
awarding monetary compensation to the respondent no. 1 in lieu of the direction
for reinstatement with payment of 50% back wages. Shri Thakur, learned
counsel for the respondent no. 1, on instructions, submitted that if adequate
monetary compensation is awarded to the respondent no. 1, she would not be
interested in reinstatement and payment of 50% back wages.
4 jg.wp1165.09.odt
5. Considering the fact that the respondent no. 1 had rendered
services for the period from 3-7-1996 till 3-7-1997 which was period of one year
and the fact that the appeal filed by her in the year 1997 came to be decided in
the year 2009, said aspect would have to taken into consideration. During the
pendency of writ petition, as a condition for granted of interim stay, the
petitioners have deposited an amount of Rs. 2,53,843/- in this Court towards
amount of back wages. The said amount was duly invested and the respondent
no. 1 has thereafter withdrawn the amount of Rs. 3,20,000/-. Considering the
period of service rendered by the respondent no. 1 and the fact that an amount
of Rs. 3,20,000/- has been received by her towards back wages, the interests of
justice would be met if total compensation of Rs. 6,00,000/- is awarded to the
respondent no. 1. This amount is determined on the basis of her period of
service, the fact that the order of reinstatement with payment of 50% back wages
operates in her favour and the respondent no. 3 having been appointed on the
post held by the respondent no. 1. Out of the amount of Rs. 6,00,000/-, an
amount of Rs. 3,20,000/- is already received by the respondent no. 1. The
petitioners shall pay the balance amount of Rs. 2,80,000/- to the respondent
no. 1 within a period of six weeks from today. On such payment being made, the
impugned judgment of the School Tribunal, Nagpur dated 27-1-2009 in Appeal
No. STC/02/2001 shall cease to operate. However, if the aforesaid amount is
not paid within aforesaid period, the judgment shall become executable. The
said amount by way of demand draft drawn in the name of respondent no. 1 can
5 jg.wp1165.09.odt
be furnished to the learned counsel for the respondent no. 1 who in turn shall
remit the same to the respondent no. 1.
Rule is disposed of in aforesaid terms. No costs.
JUDGE
wasnik
CERTIFICATE
"I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct copy of
original singed Judgment."
Uploaded by : A. Y. Wasnik, P.A. Uploaded on : 5-8-2016
