Rev.Fr.James Konat vs Asok Krishnaji Kulkarni
2016 Latest Caselaw 5889 Bom

                                                    *1*                         201.wp.4152.96


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                                                                  
                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 4152 OF 1996




                                                          
    Rev.Fr.James Konat,
    Age : 55 years, Occupation : Service,
    R/o Bishop's House, Cantonment,




                                                         
    Aurangabad.
                                                      ...PETITIONER

              -VERSUS-




                                               
    1         Ashok Krishnaji Kulkarni,
              Age : 55 years, Occupation : Service,
                                     
              R/o Aurangabad.

    2         The President,
                                    
              Rt.Rev.Dr.Ignatius D'Cunha
              St.Francic De-Sales Education Society,
              C/o Bishop's House,
              Cantonment, Aurangabad.
       


    3         The Secretary,
    



              Rev.Fr.Leslie Rodrix,
              St.Francis De-Sales Education Society,
              Jalna Road, Aurangabad.





    4         The Education Officer (Secondary),
              Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad.

    5         The Deputy Director of Education,
              Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad.





                                                      ...RESPONDENTS

                                             ...
                                     None for Petitioner. 
                        Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Shri B.A.Darak.
                         AGP for Respondents 4 and 5 : Shri P.N.Kutti. 
                                             ...

                                           CORAM:  RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

                                                       *2*                           201.wp.4152.96




                                         DATE :- 06th October, 2016




                                                                                      
    Oral Judgment :




                                                             
    1              After the learned Advocate for the Petitioner was elevated as 

the Honourable Judge of this Court, he had caused an appearance through

another Advocate. Subsequently, the second Advocate for the Petitioner

was also elevated as the Honourable Judge of this Court. Hence, a fresh

notice was issued and it was not served on the Petitioner since he had left

India and was abroad. The report dated 17.06.2013 submitted by the

Section Officer, Writ Petition Branch of this Court, indicates that service on

the Petitioner was attempted after this Court passed an order on

03.05.2013 and the Petitioner could not be served because he has left

India. A subsequent report dated 31.08.2016 of the Section Officer also

indicates the same.

2 Instead of dismissing the petition in default, I find it

appropriate to decide the same on it's merits.

3 The Petitioner has challenged the judgment of the School

Tribunal dated 15.04.1996 by which Appeal No.46/1994 filed by

Respondent No.1 herein has been allowed. The Respondent/ Management

has been directed to promote Respondent No.1/ original Appellant as the

*3* 201.wp.4152.96

Headmaster of St.Francis De-Sales High School, Aurangabad w.e.f.

01.06.1994 with all consequential benefits.

4 It is not in dispute that by resolution dated 29.03.1994, the

Management resolved to appoint the Petitioner as a Headmaster of the

said school. A grievance was raised by Respondent No.1 herein by filing an

appeal that the said resolution is unsustainable since Respondent No.1

was senior to the Petitioner. The record reveals that Respondent No.1 was

already working as an Assistant Headmaster of the said school and he was

placed in Category-B of Schedule-F of the MEPS Rules, 1981. The

Petitioner was working as a Supervisor and he was placed in Category-C of

Schedule-F. There is no dispute that the Petitioner as well as Respondent

No.1 possess the requisite qualifications and experience for being

appointed as a Headmaster.

5 The School Tribunal concluded that going by the rule of

merit-cum-seniority, as both these employees were at par on merits and

Respondent No.1 was senior to the Petitioner since he was already placed

in Category-B, the resolution dated 29.03.1994 was unsustainable. The

appeal was, therefore, allowed under Section 9(1)(b) of the MEPS Act,

1977 and the Petitioner was held to have illegally superseded Respondent

No.1.

                                                                *4*                          201.wp.4152.96




                                                                                              
           6                 Considering the above, I do not find that the School Tribunal 

has committed any error in delivering the impugned judgment.

7 This Writ Petition being devoid of merit is, therefore,

dismissed. Rule is discharged.

    kps                                     ig                  (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)