GOKULDAS SUNDERLAL BAGDI Vs. PRESIDING OFFICER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner-employee challenges the judgment dated 11-2-1992 delivered by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Amravati and aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, in Appeal No. 58/ 1989 A, In this appeal, the petitioner has challenged the order of termination dated 1-4-1989 and 5-4-1989 and by which the present respondents Nos. 2 and 3 terminated him from service and the School Tribunal has-dismissed his appeal on 11-2-1992:

(2.) SHRI Adkar, Advocate, holding for- Shri Haq, learned Counsel for the petitioner points out that the School Tribunal has found that the stand of management is that services have been terminated on accountof his unsatisfactory work is not correct. However, it has upheld the termination, only an the ground that the petitioner has forwarded copy of representation directry to the Education Officer instead of forwarding it through the Head Master required by Rule 24 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schoolconditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (hereinafter referred to as Rules, 1981)-

(3.) THE matter was heard on 20-10-2004. As nobody was present for the respondents, the matter came to be adjourned for today. Today, nobody is appering for respondents Nos. 2 and 3. Hence the matter is taken up for final disposal.