Bombay High Court
Panchashil Shikshan And Samajik ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 27 March, 2023
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote
23. WP 4917 of 2019.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.4917/2019
Panchashil Sikshan And Samajik Sewa Mandal, Kandali, Paratwada, through its
President Shri Shrikrushna Rajaramji Gawai and another
...Versus...
State of Maharashtra Through its Principal Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32
and others
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Shri C.A. Babrekar, Advocate for petitioners
Mrs. M.A. Barabde, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3
Shri D.P. Dapurkar, Advocate for respondent no.4
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.
DATE : 27/03/2023
1. The petition challenges the judgment dated
03/04/2019 passed by the learned School Tribunal, Amravati,
whereby the termination of the respondent no.4 has been set
aside and a direction for reinstatement with full back wages
was given.
2. Shri Babrekar, learned counsel for the petitioners
seeks a remand of the matter, as according to him, since the
petitioner was proceeded ex parte, the relevant material
regarding the employment of the respondent no.4 and the fact
that the respondent no.4 himself had resigned in the year 2014
itself could not be brought on record.
23. WP 4917 of 2019.odt
3. The contention is opposed by Shri Dapurkar,
learned counsel for the respondent no.4 on the ground that the
petitioner was set ex parte before the learned Tribunal, which is
justified for the reason that even though the petitioner had
appeared in response to the notice on the application for
condonation of delay, the petitioner had filed its reply and the
application was allowed in favour of the respondent no.4, the
petitioner has intentionally not chosen to tender his appearance
in the proceedings under Section 9 of the Maharashtra
Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service)
Regulation Act, 1977. It is, therefore, submitted that the
situation is of the own making of the petitioner, for which
nobody is blamed. It is also contended that in case the matter is
to be remanded back, heavy cost needs to be imposed upon the
petitioners.
4. No doubt, that the petitioner had appeared in
response to the notice on the application for condonation of
delay and was also served in the appeal, the fact remains that
the petitioner did not participate in the proceedings. The reply
to the application for condonation of delay filed on record
indicates that the post which became vacant due to the
so-called resignation of the respondent no.4 was filled in after
due permission, advertisement and interview by appointing
somebody. Though this position is controverted, however, that
is a position, which needs to be looked into by the learned
School Tribunal, considering which, the impugned judgment is
23. WP 4917 of 2019.odt
hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back
to the learned School Tribunal, Amravati, however, subject to
costs of Rs.60,000/- to be paid by the petitioner, as a condition
precedent, to the respondent no.4.
5. The parties shall appear before the learned School
Tribunal, Amravati on 01/04/2023 at 11:00 a.m. Upon the
payment of the cost being accepted by the respondent no.4, the
School Tribunal shall then proceed to fix a date and decide the
matter within a period of three months from the said date. In
case the cost is not paid or demonstrated to be paid, by
01/04/2023, the petition shall stand dismissed without further
reference to the Court. The amount of Rs.2,00,000/-, deposited
in this Court be transferred to the learned School Tribunal,
Amravati and shall be deposited in an interest carrying account
for a duration of the appeal.
6. The writ petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms
and disposed of accordingly.
(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Wadkar
