Uttam Vithal Vaidya vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11227 Bom

                                                               947-wp-2492-2020.odt



           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     947 WRIT PETITION NO.2492 OF 2020

                         UTTAM VITHAL VAIDYA
                                 VERSUS
               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                      ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Kolhare S.R.

AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. S.G. Sangle ...

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & S.G. MEHARE, J.J.

DATED : 18th AUGUST, 2021

PER COURT:-

1. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the

respondent no.3 school operated by respondent no.4, on 11.06.1993. On

15.12.1997, he was terminated. He approached the school tribunal under

the The Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of

Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (for short 'M.E.P.S.' Act). By judgment

dated 12.12.2000 delivered by the school tribunal in Appeal No.2 of 1998,

his termination was quashed and set aside and he was granted 100%

back-wages.

2. The management approached the learned Single Judge of

this Court in Writ Petition No.305 of 2001. By an interim order, the

impugned judgment of the school tribunal was stayed. By judgment dated

03.07.2014, the learned Single Judge disposed of the writ petition by

refusing to interfere with the order of reinstatement. However, the entire

back-wages were refused to the present petitioner. The petitioner was

then reinstated in service on 13.10.2014. He was again terminated on

947-wp-2492-2020.odt

29.06.2020. He has challenged the termination before the school tribunal

under the M.E.P.S Act. He was not paid the back-wages by the

management from the date of his reinstatement on 13.10.2014 till his

termination on 29.06.2020. He is claiming the back-wages for this period

in this petition as the pending appeal would not cover this period. The

petitioner has passed away on 01.04.2021 due to viral infection.

3. Despite service of Court notice on respondent nos.3 and 4,

no appearance has been entered either in person or through an advocate.

4. Office to issue notice for fnal hearing to respondent nos.3

and 4, returnable on 21.09.2021. It be noted that if these respondents do

not cause appearance, this Court would proceed to decide this petition

fnally.

  (S.G. MEHARE. J)                         (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J)




Mujaheed//