SUBASH VIDYA MANDAL PIMPALWANDI Vs. PUSHPALATA PRABHAKAR DESHMUKH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this Letters Patent Appeal, the appellants have taken exception to the judgment and order dated 2-5-2005 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 7373 of 2003. The first appellant is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and a public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. The first appellant is running a Secondary School (Subash Vidya Mandir) which is recognised and which receives 100% grant-in-aid. The second appellant is the Principal of the said school. It is not in dispute that the respondent was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the school run by the first appellant on probation and on completion of the probationary period of two years, she is deemed to have become a permanent employee of the first appellant.

(2.) An appeal was preferred by the respondent being Appeal No. 88 of 2000 before the Presiding Officer of the School Tribunal at Pune. The case made out by the respondent in the appeal was that she was issued a memorandum on 16-3-1999 by the appellants. Though a reply was given by her to the memorandum, subsequently a further memorandum was issued to her by the appellants on the ground that she reported for duty ten minutes late. It is alleged that on 19-10-2000, she was not allowed to sign the muster by the Chairman of the first appellant as well as the Headmaster of the School. It is alleged that after re-opening of the school on 30-11-2000, she was not allowed to sign the muster and discharge her duties. Thus, the appeal was preferred on the ground that there was otherwise termination of the respondent.

(3.) The appellants contested the appeal by filing Written Statement. The appellants relied upon the memorandums issued from time to time to the respondent. Reliance is placed on the letter dated 1-11-2000 issued by the second appellant to the respondent calling upon her to submit Medical Fitness Certificate. The specific stand taken is that since the respondent did not produce the Medical Fitness Certificate, the appellants were not in a position to allow the respondent to resume duty. However, it was contended that there was no cause of action for preferring the Appeal as the appellants never terminated the employment of the respondent. The School Tribunal by the judgment and order dated 5-4-2002 held that there was otherwise termination of employment of the respondent and the said termination was bad in law. The learned Presiding Officer passed an order directing the appellants to reinstate the respondent with effect from 13-11-2000 with full backwages from the date of termination till the date of reinstatement. Time of two months was granted to the appellants to comply with the said order. The Tribunal has recommended to the State Government that the backwages directed to be paid to the respondent may be deducted from the grant due and payable to the management and be paid to the respondent. Being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the Tribunal, the appellants preferred the Writ Petition. By the impugned order dated 2-5-2005, the learned Single Judge has summarily dismissed the Writ Petition.