ANIL DATTATRAYA ADE ANIL DATTATRAYA ADE Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER SCHOOL TRIBUNAL AMRAVATI REGION AMRAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH these petitions have been placed before us pursuant to an order passed by the Division Bench (Coram: R. K. Batta and J. P. Devadhar, JJ.) on April 16, 2002.

(2.) DEALING with the questions raised in the above petitions as also in other matters, and after hearing the "learned Advocates for the parties at length", the Division Bench felt that prima facie contradictory views had been expressed in some of the decisions as to whether the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"), would or would not apply to Polytechnic institution, which is a technical institution. The Division Bench observed that the question raised before it related Pharmacy institution, which was also a technical institution. There was also a controversy as to whether the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation (Amendment) Act, 1990 (Maharashtra Act No. XXXII of 1990), was declaratory in nature so as to have retrospective operation.

(3.) WHEREAS in (P. D. Prabhudesai v. Principal, M. T. E. Societies Walchand College of Engineering, Vishrambaug at Sangli) Writ Petition No. 2719 of 1984 and (Mohd, Israr Siddiqui v. Board of Technical Education through its Director and others) Writ Petition No. 1527 of 1987, it was held that the provisions of the Act would not apply to Polytechnic institutions, in (Abdullah Jameel Ahmed Ansari and others v. M. H. Saboo Siddik Polytechnic and others) 1996 (1) C. L. R. 85 the Act was held applicable to such institutions.