GRAMIN YUVAK VIKAS SHIKSHAN MANDAL, KINHI NAIK AND ONE ANOTHER Vs. SHIVNARAYAN DATTA RAUT AND ONE ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In the present petition, although the rival parties have raised various questions for determination, one particular question assumes significance in the light of various judgments referred by the parties, which appear to be conflicting. The question pertains to Section 5 (3) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private School (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to "MEPS Act" for the sake of brevity) and Rule 15 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private School (Conditions of Service) Regulation Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to "MEPS Rules" for the sake of brevity). The controversy is, as to whether entire sub-rules (1) to (6) of Rule 15 of the MEPS Rules apply to an employee appointed on probation or only sub-rule (6) of Rule 15 of MEPS Rules applies to such an employee appointed on probation, when read with Section 5(3) of the MEPS Act.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the rival parties have invited attention of this Court to various judgments pertaining to the said question and diametrically opposite views have been canvassed.

(3.) Mr. M. M. Agnihotri, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has referred to the general position of law pertaining to the rights of an employee appointed on probation and invited attention of this Court to judgments of Division Bench and learned Single Judges of this Court, holding that only sub-rule (6) of Rule 15 of the MEPS Rules read with Section 5(3) of the MEPS Act, would apply to an employee appointed on probation.