VIDARBHA YOUTH WELFARE SOCIETY Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned Counsels for the parties.

(2.) All these petitions by the employer, challenge the judgments delivered by the learned School Tribunal, Amravati dated 23/3/2016 in Appeals filed by the employees who were terminated by the petitioners, which termination has been set aside by the learned School Tribunal by the impugned judgments. Since a common question arises in these petitions, as indicated below these petitions have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment.

(3.) In Writ Petition No.4272/2016 the respondent no.3- Shri Manohar Govindram Kalalkar, had in pursuance to an advertisement in daily news paper 'Hindustan ' ' published on 12/1/2008 by the petitioner, applied and was initially, by an order dated 1/2/2008 appointed as a Laboratory Attendant on contract basis in the Electronics and Telecommunication Department of the Polytechnic College, run by the petitioner no.1, having been selected in the interview held on 15/1/2008, and having been recommended by the Selection Committee. The appointment was stated to be temporary and on contract basis for the academic session 2007-2008 on fixed remuneration of Rs.2,000/- per month. The said appointment order indicated that on completion of the session, the appointment of the respondent no.3 will be automatically terminated without any prior notice and in case the respondent no.3 agreed to the above terms, he should join duties immediately, which was so done by the respondent no.3. The respondent no.3 thereafter, was continued for the subsequent academic sessions with artificial breaks after each session. On 1/2/2013 a fresh appointment order came to be issued to the respondent no.3, in which he was again appointed as a Laboratory Assistant, w.e.f 1/2/2013. Clause -1 of the appointment order indicated that the appointment was temporary, however, no period was mentioned. Clause - 2 of the appointment order, indicated that the appointment was on 1-2 years probation, which would commence from the date the respondent no.3 joins. Clause-3 stated that the seniority of the respondent no.3, would be counted from 1/2/2013 to the post of Laboratory Assistant. Clause - 7 indicated that in case the respondent no.3 wanted to leave the employment in the future he would have to give an advance one month 's notice or salary of one month in lieu of the same. Clause - 8 required the respondent no.3 to acquire the requisite educational qualifications, as per the Rules in case he did not have it. The services of the respondent no.3 came to be terminated by the order dated 30/4/2014. This order of termination referred to the order of the Hon 'ble Joint Charity Commissioner, Amravati in Appeal No.3/2010 and Appeal No.4/2010 dated 13/12/2011, whereby the Management of the petitioner no.1-Society was declared illegal, which was upheld up to the Hon 'ble Apex Court. It further indicated that the Executive Council of the Society in its meeting held on 29/3/2014 had resolved to follow the decisions as rendered in the above matters. It further referred to the order of the Chairman dated 30/4/2014, by which he had communicated that the services of non-teaching staff was appointed without due procedure approved by competent authority and was required to be terminated immediately, placing reliance upon which, the services of the respondent no.3 were terminated with immediate effect. This termination came to be challenged by the respondent no.3 by filing an appeal under Section 9 (1) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (for short, "the MEPS Act ", hereinafter), in which by judgment dated 23/3/2016, the learned School Tribunal, Amravati has allowed the same, thereby quashing and setting aside the termination order dated 30/4/2014 and directing reinstatement with all consequent benefits of continuity and back wages, which is the subject matter of challenge in the present petitions.