Shri Bankatswami Shikshan ... vs Gopalrao Baburao Sondge & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 4468 Bom

                                                          WP No. 5480/03
                                      1


                  IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
              APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                        WRIT PETITION NO. 5480 OF 2003

          Bankatswami Shikshan Sanstha
          Khadkighat Tq. & Dist. Beed
          (Through its President :
          Dr. Laxmanrao Kondibarao Bhosale,
          Aged 62 years, Occu. Medical Profession,
          R/o. Paithan, Dist. Aurangabad
          (Khadkighat Tq. & Dist. Beed)            ....Petitioner.


                  Versus



 1.       Shri. Gopalrao Baburao Sondge,
          Aged 51 years, Occu. NIL,
          R/o. "Laxmikunj" Bindusara Colony,
          Beed.

 2.       Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar
          Marathwada University,
          Aurangabad.
          (Through Its Registrar)

 3.       The State of Maharashtra
          (Through Its Joint Director,
          Higher Education, Aurangabad).

 4.       Shivaji s/o. Baburao Shinde,
          Age 60 years, Occu. Advocate,
          R/o. Sarkarwada, Cidco N-4,
          Aurangabad.

 5.       Bhimrao s/o. Kondiba Bhosale,
          Age 86 years, Occu. Agriculture,
          R/o. 11, Phule Colony in front of
          Shivaji High School, Khokadpura,
          Aurangabad.

 6.       Sow Saroj Gopalrao Sondge,
          Age 58 years, Occu. Retired,




::: Uploaded on - 14/07/2017                  ::: Downloaded on - 15/07/2017 00:41:57 :::
                                                               WP No. 5480/03
                                       2


          R/o. Bindusara Colony (West),
          Near Water Tank, Nagar Road,
          Beed, Tq. & Dist. Beed.                 ....Respondents.


 Mr. S.B. Talekar, Advocate for petitioner.
 Mr. Pradeep Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent No. 1.
 Mr. R.V. Dasalkar, AGP for respondent No. 3/State.
 Mr. N.L. Jadhav, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 to 6.


                               CORAM       :   T.V. NALAWADE AND
                                               SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.
                               DATED   :         July 13, 2017.


 JUDGMENT :

. The petition is filed for relief of declaration that on

8.7.2003 and 1.9.2003 orders were obtained from this Court in

Writ Petition No. 751/2003 by playing fraud upon the Court and

further, relief is claimed to recall the orders and to restore the

Writ Petition No. 751/2003. Both the sides are heard.

2. Writ Petition No. 751/2003 was filed by respondent

No. 1 to challenge the suspension order issued against him by

the management, present petitioner. On 8.7.2003 submission

was made in the petition before this Court that respondent No. 1

had tendered the resignation and it was accepted by the

management and there was the grievance only in respect of

payment of salary. In view of this submission, notice was issued

WP No. 5480/03

to management for making further orders. In response to the

order of notice, the counsel for the management appeared and

he on written instruction submitted that the management had

withdrawn the chargesheet which was issued against respondent

No. 1 and the management had also accepted the resignation by

passing necessary resolution and there was no order of

suspension against respondent No. 1. In view of these

statements by both the sides, this Court disposed of the matter

in following terms :-

"In view of the said order, nothing farther survives in the petition except the legal dues of the petitioner for the same for services he rendered with the respondent No. 1. We direct that the legal dues of the petitioner be settled as expeditiously as possible within a period of two months from today."

3. It is the case of petitioner that the Chairman was not

aware of the aforesaid circumstances and behind his back, some

record was created falsely probably by the Secretary and Vice

Chairman and so, the fraud was played upon the Court. This

Court has gone through the record produced which include the

resignation addressed to the Chairman himself. It appears that

there is some dispute amongst the persons of management and

WP No. 5480/03

there are two groups. In any case, the management was

represented by counsel in this Court and on the basis of the

statement made by the counsel, the aforesaid order was made

by this Court. It appears that the petitioner is now agitating the

matter again as respondent No. 1 is claiming the salary amount

in respect of the suspension period. That point cannot be

considered and could not have been considered in view of the

aforesaid submissions made before this Court in the said

proceeding. That point needs to be dealt with separately. In view

of the circumstances that the counsel appointed by the

management had made the statement and no blame is put on

the counsel by the petitioner, it is not possible to hold that fraud

was played upon the Court by producing the record of aforesaid

nature. Further, the petitioner has not produced the proceeding

book showing that on 20.5.2003 no such resolution was passed

by the management. This Court holds that it is not possible to

reopen the matter again. In the result, the petition stands

dismissed. Rule stands discharged.

          [SUNIL K. KOTWAL, J.]            [T.V. NALAWADE, J.]



 ssc/