Sarla Sneh Mandal vs The State Of Mah & Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 8581 Bom

                                                              W.P. No.7905/2006
                                      (( 1 ))

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                        WRIT PETITION NO.7905 OF 2006


 Sarla Sneh Mandal,
 Bal Dnyan Mandir, Primary School,
 Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad,
 through its Secretary                          ...      PETITIONER

          VERSUS

 1.       The State of Maharashtra
          through Secretary,
          Education Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai

 2.       The Education Officer (Primary),
          Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad.

 3.       Superintendent,
          Pay & G.P.F. Unit (Primary),
          Education Department,
          Aurangabad.

 4.       Smt. Suman d/o Lalit Reddy,
          Age 42 years, Occ. Service,
          R/o Flat No.E-2, Muthiyan Apartment,
          Samarth Nagar, Aurangabad ...    RESPONDENTS

                                 .....
 Shri B.L. Sagar Killarikar, Advocate for petitioner
 Shri B.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for respondent No.1
 Shri U.R. Awate, Advocate for respondent No.4
                                 .....

                                      WITH

                   CIVIL APPLICATION NO.4190 OF 2012 IN
                      WRIT PETITION NO.7905 OF 2006

 Smt. Suman d/o Lalit Reddy,
 Age 42 years, Occu. Service,
 R/o Flat No.E-2, Muthiyan Apartment,
 Samarth Nagar, Aurangabad.       ...             APPLICANT

          VERSUS



::: Uploaded on - 14/11/2017                    ::: Downloaded on - 15/11/2017 01:16:02 :::
                                                             W.P. No.7905/2006
                                    (( 2 ))


 1.       The State of Maharashtra
          through its Secretary,
          School Education and
          Sports Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

 2.       The Education Officer (Primary),
          Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad.

 3.       The Superintendent,
          Pay and G.P.F. Unit (Primary),
          Education Department,
          Aurangabad.                  ...    RESPONDENTS
                           (Original Respondent Nos.1 to 3)

 4)       Sarla Sneha Mandal
          Bal Dnyan Mandir Primary School,
          Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad,
          through its Secretary,
          Smt. Rajmati Saswade,
          Age 57 years, Occu. Household,
          R/o Near Dhanwantri Medical Store,
          Khadkeshwar, Aurangabad. ...       RESPONDENT
                                     (Original Petitioner)

                                 .....
 Shri U.R. Awate, Advocate for applicant
 Shri B.L. Sagar Killarikar, Advocate for writ petitioner
 Shri B.A. Shinde, A.G.P. for State
                                 .....

                               CORAM:     RAVINDRA .V. GHUGE AND
                                          SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.

DATED : 9th NOVEMBER, 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.):

1. The petitioner seeks to challenge the order dated

30.10.2006 and 1.7.2006, passed by respondent Nos.2 and 3,

by which the petitioner is directed to pay 70% back wages to

the employee Smt. Suman Lalit Reddy from their own coffers.

W.P. No.7905/2006 (( 3 ))

2. We have considered the submissions of Shri Sagar

Killarikar, learned Advocate for the petitioner management,

learned A.G.P. and Shri Aute, learned counsel on behalf of the

employee.

3. Since the whole issue pertains to the dispute with

regard to the termination of the employee, who has not been

arrayed as respondent in this petition, the said employee has

preferred Civil Application No.4190/2012. Learned counsel for

the respective sides do not oppose the said application for

impleading the employee as respondent No.4 in this petition.

The Civil Application No.4190/2012 is, therefore, allowed.

The employee Smt. Suman Lalit Reddy is permitted to be

arrayed as respondent No.4 in the Writ Petition. Learned

Advocate waives notice.

4. Respondent No.4 was aggrieved by her termination

dated 7.8.1996 at the hands of the petitioner. She

approached the School Tribunal, Aurangabad in Appeal

No.271/1996. By judgment dated 5.8.2000, the appeal was

allowed, her termination was quashed and set aside, she was

granted reinstatement with continuity in service with

consequential benefits and 70% back wages along with costs

of Rs.600/-. The said judgment has not been challenged by

the petitioner before this Court, and as a consequence, by

W.P. No.7905/2006 (( 4 ))

passage of 17 years, the said judgment has attained finality.

5. It is in the said judgment dated 5.8.2000, that the

School Tribunal directed the management specifically to pay

the 70% back wages of the employee - respondent No.4.

Though the Education Department was respondent No.4

before the School Tribunal, the direction to pay the back

wages has been specifically made as against the petitioner

Society.

6. Considering the above, and keeping in view that

the judgment of the School Tribunal has attained finality, we

cannot modify the said judgment in our extraordinary

jurisdiction being exercised under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, in the absence of any challenge. In this

backdrop, the direction of the Education Department to the

petitioner Society to make the payment of the 70% back

wages can neither be termed as being perverse nor

erroneous.

7. This petition being devoid of merit, is, therefore,

dismissed. Rule is discharged.

          ( SUNIL K. KOTWAL )                      ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE )
               JUDGE                                      JUDGE