Bombay High Court
Dinesh Rajendra Chavan vs Lokmanya Nagar Shikshan Mandal Through ... on 23 September, 2025
2025:BHC-AS:40275
Salgaonkar 83 WP-5206-21.docx
MANDIRA MILIND
Digitally signed by MANDIRA
MILIND SALGAONKAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
SALGAONKAR Date: 2025.09.24 18:07:29
+0530
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.5206 OF 2021
Dinesh Rajendra Chavan .....Petitioner
: Versus :
Lokmanya Nagar Shikshan Mandal through
its President/Secretary & Ors. ....Respondents
Mr.Vinayak R. Kumbhar, for the Petitioner.
Mr.B.B.Dahiphale, A.G.P. for the Respondent No.3-State.
CORAM : SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.
DATED : 23 SEPTEMBER 2025.
P.C :
1) The Petition challenges the Judgment and Order dated 13/09/2019
passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Navi Mumbai,
dismissing Appeal No.12 of 2019 preferred by the Petitioner, challenging
the termination order dated 14/03/2016.
2) Briefly stated, facts of the case are that :
The Petitioner belongs to Scheduled Tribe category. He was
appointed as 'Shikshan Sevak' in Respondent No.2-School on
18/11/2013. Respondent No.2 is a aided secondary school of the first
Respondent-Management. On 30/01/2014, Respondent No.3-Education
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
Salgaonkar 83 WP-5206-21.docx
Officer granted approval to the Petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak
for three years. However, before completing the period of service of three
years, the Management terminated the services of the Petitioner by order
dated 14/03/2016. Aggrieved by the order dated 14/03/2016, the
Petitioner preferred Appeal No.12 of 2019 before the School Tribunal.
The Appeal was contested by the Management by filing written statement.
By impugned Judgment and Order dated 13/09/2019, the Tribunal has
proceeded to dismiss the Appeal. The order dated 13/09/2019 passed by
the School Tribunal is subject matter of challenge in the present Petition.
3) Notices were issued to Respondents by order dated 15/03/2023.
Despite service of notice, none has appeared on behalf of the Respondent-
Management. Therefore, fresh notices for final disposal were issued vide
order dated 27/09/2024. Even fresh notices for final disposal have been
served on the Respondent-Management, who has failed to cause
appearance in the Petition. In the result, this Court is left with no
alternative, but to decide the Petition in absence of the appearance on part
of Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
4) During the pendency of the Petition, Petitioner has passed away on
16/07/2024 and his legal heirs are brought on record. Legal heirs of the
Petitioner are prosecuting the present Petition.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
Salgaonkar 83 WP-5206-21.docx
5) I have heard Mr.Kumbar, learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioner and Mr.Dahiphale, learned A.G.P. appearing for Respondent
No.3.
6) After having considered the submissions canvassed by the learned
counsel appearing for the parties, it is seen that the Petitioner was
appointed as Shikshan Sevak for a period from 18/11/2013 to
17/11/2016. His appointment was approved by the Education Officer.
However, before the Petitioner could complete three years service as
Shikshan Sevak, the Management proceeded to terminate his services by
order dated 14/03/2016.
7) Perusal of the Termination Order dated 14/03/2016 would indicate
that the termination is founded on the misconduct alleged against the
Petitioner. It appears that fact finding enquiries were conducted against the
Petitioner in which he was indicted. Thus, termination of the Petitioner is
founded on allegations of misconduct. Admittedly, no departmental
enquiry was conducted against the Petitioner nor was he given any
opportunity of defence. The School Tribunal has ignored this vital aspect
while dismissing the Appeal preferred by the Petitioner. Instead of holding
the termination was stigmatic in absence of an enquiry, the Tribunal went
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
Salgaonkar 83 WP-5206-21.docx
into the merits of the allegations levelled against the Petitioner, as if these
allegations were held to be proved in an enquiry. In my view, therefore,
the impugned order passed by the Tribunal is clearly unsustainable and
liable to be set aside.
8) As observed above, the Petitioner has passed away on 16/07/2024.
and, therefore, there is no question of his reinstatement in service. He
worked as Shikshan Sevak on monthly honorarium of Rs.8,000/-. He had
put in less than three years service with Respondent-Management.
Considering this position, in my view, ends of justice would meet if
lumpsum compensation is directed to be paid to the legal heirs of the
Petitioner, which would provide some solace to the family consisting of
Petitioner's wife and minor child.
9) I, accordingly, proceed to pass the following order.
i) Judgment and Order dated 13/09/2019 passed by the School
Tribunal is set aside.
ii) Termination of the Petitioner vide order dated 14/03/2016 is
also set aside.
iii) It is held that the Petitioner is entitled to lumpsum
compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.Two Lakhs only) in lieu of
reinstatement and back wages.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
Salgaonkar 83 WP-5206-21.docx
iv) Beyond the lumpsum compensation of Rs.2,00,000/- (Rs.
Two Lakhs), Petitioner shall not be entitled any other service related
benefits from the Respondent-Management.
v) The amount of lumpsum compensation of Rs.2,00,000/-
(Rs.Two Lakhs only) shall be paid by Respondent Nos.1 and 2 to the
legal heir of the deceased Petitioner, viz. Petitioner No.1a-
Smt.Dhanashree Dinesh Chavan within a period of two months.
10) With the above direction, Writ Petition is partly allowed and
disposed of.
11) There shall be no order as to costs.
[SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.]
_____________________________________________________________________________
Tuesday, 23 September 2025
