Rahul Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, ... vs Shankar S/O Kashiram Mehere And ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 11165 Bom

2023:BHC-NAG:15927


                                                            1                                 53.WP.945-2023.odt




                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 945 OF 2023
                          ( Rahul Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati & Anr.
                                                Vs.
                                Shankar s/o Kashiram Mehere & Ors. )

         Office Notes, Office Memoranda                     Court's or Judge's orders
         of Coram, Appearances, Court's
         orders     or    directions and
         Registrar's orders


                                 Mrs. Ayushi Dangre Tripathi, Advocate for the Petitioners.
                                 Mrs. Radhika Bajaj, Advocate for the Respondent No.1.
                                 Mr. Harshawardhan Dhumale, AGP for the Respondent/State.




                                 CORAM:       AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.

DATED : 31st OCTOBER, 2023

Heard Mrs. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mrs. Bajaj, learned counsel for the respondent No.1 and Mr. Dhumale, learned AGP for the respondent/State.

2. The petition challenges the judgment dated 22.07.2022 passed by the learned School Tribunal partly allowing the appeal by setting aside the termination order dated 16.03.2020 and directing reinstatement with back wages/salary and so also granting liberty to the Management to start fresh inquiry.

3. The basic reason for setting aside the termination was that in the inquiry proceedings the Convener has participated in the inquiry by signing the evidence of witnesses on behalf of the Management as well as the show 2 53.WP.945-2023.odt

cause notice and statement of allegation which would indicate that the President who is the Convener had acted in the capacity of the complainant as well as the representative of the Management. This is something, which would not be permissible in order to maintain the sanctity of the inquiry.

4. Though the impugned action of termination and the inquiry is supported by Mrs. Tripathi, learned counsel for the petitioners, however is unable to point out that what has been recorded by the learned School Tribunal regarding the role of Convener is incorrect. In that view of the matter, the inquiry cannot be sustained as it stands vitiated. I, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere in the impugned order.

5. The Petition is therefore dismissed. No costs.

(AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

SD. Bhimte

Signed by: Mr.S.D.Bhimte Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 01/11/2023 18:53:55