Bombay High Court
Satish Manikrao Suryawanshi vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 20 December, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 14749 OF 2017
Satish s/o Manikrao Suryawanshi
Age : 53 Yrs., Occ. Service,
R/o : Plot No. 15-A, Sudarshan,
Nagar, N-11,HUDCO,
Aurangabad, Dist. : Aurangabad. .... PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through Secretary to
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Director of Education
Maharashtra State, Pune
Dist. Pune.
3. The Deputy Director of Education
Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad
Dist. Aurangabad.
4. The Head Master
Shri Saraswati Bhuvan
Madhyamik Va Uchha Madhyamik
Vidyalaya, Pimpriraja,
Tq. and Dist. Aurangabad. .... RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 24/12/2017 01:36:16 :::
2 W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
......
Mr. S.M.Vibhute, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. M.M.Nerlikar, A.G.P. for Resp. - State.
......
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA &
V.L.ACHLIYA, JJ.
DATE OF JUDGMENT : 20th DECEMBER, 2017
......
ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER - S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.]
. Mr. Vibhute, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner was working with the
respondent No. 4/college. The recognition of the said
college was withdrawn. The petitioner was paid salary till
derecognition. 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 20/09/2009.
3 W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
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 the date of de-recognition till absorption and to grant
all other consequential benefits.
2. The learned Assistant Govt. 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 the de-recognition of the college.
Thereafter has been absorbed vide order passed on
20/11/2009. 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.
4 W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
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 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 salary for the said period can not be accepted.
However, the services from the date of decognition 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.
5 W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
Rule accordingly made absolute in above
terms.
[V.L.ACHLIYA, J.] [S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.]
KNP/W.P. 14749.2017 - [J]
