VIJAYA ULHAS SAWANT Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Ms. Kavita Deshpande for the petitioners, Mr. Rane for respondent no.2 and Mr. Angal for respondent nos.3 and 4.

(2.) . Respondent no.2 Adarsh Marathi Shala situate at Section 24, near Ashok Talkies, Ulhasnagar , is run by the society, viz. Adarsha Shikshan Prasarak Mandal , respondent no.3. The fourth respondent school run by the third respondent nos.3 and 4 receive 100% grants from respondent no.1. The first petitioner is the Head Mistress in respondent no.4 school, while remaining petitioners are Assistant Teachers. It is the petitioners' case that in the month of March 1991, the first petitioner came to know that respondent no.3 intends to close down respondent no.4 school and accordingly she wrote a letter to the Administrative Officer, Ulhasnagar Municipal Council, informing about the said fact. The second respondent, vide his letter dated 1st April, 1991 informed the first petitioner that respondent no.3 cannot close down respondent no.4 school without prior permission of the Government and that without prior permission of his office no school leaving certificates could be issued and if such certificates are issued, the Management and the Head Mistress will be held responsible. The petitioners have averred that the first petitioner who is Head Mistress of the school, refused to sign school leaving certificates but respondent no.3 started issuing school leaving certificates to students by having a rubber stamp of the signature of the first petitioner. The first petitioner accordingly, by her letter dated 30th April, 1991, wrote to the second respondent for taking immediate steps against respondent nos.3 and 4. Aggrieved by the action of respondent nos.3 and 4 in closing down the school, the petitioners have filed the present writ petition.

(3.) . While issuing Rule on 20th September, 1991 this Court granted interim relief by ordering appointment of an Administrator to run the school when it was found that the school was closed. This Court further directed that the issue raised by the State Government in the return in para 4 that over payment has been made to respondent no.3, shall be examined at the time of final hearing of the writ petition.