Bombay High Court
Dinesh Manik Suryavanshi vs The Education Officer Brihanmumbai ... on 23 October, 2024
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge, M.M. Sathaye
2024:BHC-AS:43122
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7687 OF 2022
Dinesh Manik Suryavanshi
Age - 31 Years, Occ. - Service,
Residing at B- 205,
Mehet Park Cooperative Housing
Society Limited, Taluka - Kalyan
District : Thane. ...Petitioner
Versus
PALLAVI
MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR
1. The Education Officer,
Digitally signed by Brihanmumbai Municipal Corporation,
PALLAVI MAHENDRA
WARGAONKAR
Date: 2024.11.07
Having office at Education Department,
11:35:52 +0530 Triveni Sangam,
BMC School Building,
Mahadev Palav Marg,
Curry Road ( East),
Mumbai - 400 012. ...Respondent
...
Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye a/w Ms. Gauri Velankar, Mr. Shantanu Gurav
and Mr. Saarth Chordia, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr Dhrupad Patil a/w Mr. Ravindra Sirsikar and Ms. Neelima
Kharde, for Respondent - MCGM.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
&
M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE :- 23rd OCTOBER, 2024
1 of 7
::: Uploaded on - 07/11/2024 ::: Downloaded on - 09/11/2024 06:49:34 :::
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally
by the consent of the parties.
2. The Petitioner has put forth prayer clauses (b) and (c),
as under:-
(b) That by appropriate Writ, order or directions of this
Hon'ble Court, impugned order dated 17 th December
2021 passed by the Respondent No. 2, Education
Officer thereby terminating the services of Petitioner
as a Shikshan Sevak deserves to be quashed and set
aside;
(c) That by appropriate Writ, order or directions of this
Hon'ble Court, the Respondent No. 2, Education Officer
may be directed to reinstate the Petitioner in services of
Brihanmumbai, Mahanagar Palika School as Shikshan
Sevak forthwith along with continuity in service and full
back wages."
3. The Petitioner was appointed as a Shikshan Sevak by
order dated 23rd January, 2020 in the school operated by the
Education Department of the Brihanmumbai Municipal
Corporation, Mumbai. He joined duties on 31st January, 2020 in the
school, "A Ward, Colaba Municipal Upper Primary English
School". He tendered his caste validity certificate.
2 of 7
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
4. The Police clearance certificate indicated a criminal
case pending before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in
connection with C.R. No.I - 333 of 2017. However, the Court of
Criminal Jurisdiction delivered a judgment of acquittal in R.C.C.
No.767 of 2017, on 30th October, 2021. The Education Officer, vide
the impugned order dated 12th April, 2022, terminated the services
of the Petitioner based on the Police verification report, despite
having the knowledge of his acquittal.
5. The said Education Officer has filed an affidavit-in-
reply contending in paragraph nos.9, 10, 11 and 12, as under:-
"9) Further it is submitted that, during the period when the
order of termination of candidates subject to the clause
7 of appointment order was pending for the signature
of the Education Officer, after all procedures the
present Petitioner filed the order and judgment of his
acquittal in the criminal case of RCC 767/2017 dated
30/10/2021. Therefore the Education Officer kept
pending the termination of the present petitioner
considering order and judgment filed by the petitioner.
Thereafter the present petitioner filed the certified copy
of the judgment dated 19/01/2022.
10) That thereafter on 01/02/2022 the documents of the
petitioner has been sent for opinion of Law Officer to
overview the remarks of police clearance certificate
and the judgment dated 30/10/2021 in respect of
Circular No. MPM/2/1998 dated 22/05/2017 about
character verification for appointment in service and to
decide the termination of the petitioner. The deputy
3 of 7
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
law officer (criminal) opined to sent it to the Chief
Personnel Officer for the feedback about termination.
The Joint Chief Personnel Officer give opinion that the
issue of termination to be decided at department level
according to the circulars issued from time to time in
respect of the character verification and reports. Hereto
annexed and marked as Exhibit-'D' is the copy of
circular No. MPM/2/1998 dated 22/05/2017.
11) That, therefore following all this procedure the
appointment of present petitioner as a Shikshan Sewak
was terminated on the ground that the police clearance
certificate of petitioner received in given time frame
reflected the remarks of the criminal case pendency
which was subject to clause 7 of the appointment order
as stated in order dated 23.01.2020 and the order of
termination also received by petitioner dated
12/04/2022.
12) That it is also worthwhile to note that, the present
petitioner again applied to the Shikshan Sewak post by
advertisement dated 09/02/2024 and selected and
appointed as a Shikshan Sewak vide appointment no.
EOR/OD/appointment/103 dated 12/08/2024. Hereto
annexed and marked as Exhibit-'E' is the copy of
appointment order No.EOR/OD/appointment/103
dated 12/08/2024."
6. It is, thus,obvious that the Education Officer was aware
of the judgment of acquittal dated 30th October, 2021 and yet, he
terminated the services of the Petitioner, vide order dated 12 th April,
2022. It is inconsequential that the Petitioner once again made an
attempt for seeking employment pursuant to the advertisement dated
9th February, 2024, got selected and was appointed as Shikshan
4 of 7
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
Sevak, vide order dated 12th August, 2024.
7. This is an open and shut case. The foundational reason
for terminating the Petitioner was the pendency of the criminal case.
Ironically, though the Petitioner was acquitted by the judgment
dated 30th December, 2021, the Education Officer has terminated his
services on 12th April, 2022.
8. The learned Advocate for the Petitioner has taken
instructions and submits that in order to render a ' quietus' to the
litigation between the parties, though the Petitioner is entitled for
full back-wages in view of the glaring circumstances, he is willing
to accept only 50% back-wages and forego 50%. He, however,
clarifies that if the Corporation decides to further litigate on this
point, his prayer for full back-wages would be revived. We accept
the said statement.
9. The learned Advocate for the Corporation submits that
he has not instructions to accept the concession made by the
Petitioner. He is directed to oppose the prayer of back-wages.
10. In view of the above, this Writ Petition is partly
5 of 7
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
allowed. The impugned order of termination dated 12th April, 2022
stands quashed and set aside. Considering the statement of the
Petitioner and keeping in view the glaring aspect that the Education
Officer terminated the service of the Petitioner, despite fully
knowing that he has received judgment of acquittal on 30 th October,
2021, we are granting 50% back-wages to the Petitioner in view of
the statement made. Needless to state, if the Corporation decides to
further litigate on this point, the prayer of the Petitioner for full
back-wages is kept open.
11. Let the back-wages be calculated for the period
of unemployment, till his subsequent fresh employment, to the
extent of 50% and be paid to the Petitioner within a period of 60
days from today, failing which, the amount shall carry simple
interest @ 6% p.a.. Since the Petitioner joined employment as
Shikshan Sevak on 31st January, 2020, his period as Shikshan Sevak
would conclude on 30th January, 2023 and he would be entitled for
all consequential benefits of being treated as Assistant Teacher in
accordance with the rules applicable, including the difference in the
pay scale. The subsequent selection of the Petitioner, vide
appointment order dated 12th August, 2024 is treated as being
6 of 7
1-WP-7687-2022-(C).odt
inconsequential, considering the effect of this judgment.
12. Rule is made partly absolute in the above terms.
(M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
7 of 7
