RAMCHANDRA PANDURANG DALAL Vs. MUNICIPAL COUNCIL PAVNI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. The petitioner in the present writ petition seeks to quash the orders dated 6th September and 27th September of 2003 issued by the respondents no.1 and 3 respectively and further to declare the petitioner to be senior to respondent no.2 and consequently for directions to the respondents 1 and 3 to prepare the seniority list.

(2.) Undisputed facts are that the petitioner and the respondent no.2 are employed as the assistant teachers in the school run by the respondent no.1 under the name and style Municipal High School, Pavni. The petitioner had been in the employment since 1975, whereas the respondent no.2 was appointed on 27/06/1983. The appointment of the respondent no.2 was as a trained teacher. The appointment of the petitioner since 1975 was in the capacity as untrained teacher. However, the petitioner acquired training qualification, i.e. B.Ed. in the year 1983. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner had appeared for the B.Ed. Examination held for the year 1982- 83, the general results of such examination were declared on 25.5.1983 but the result of the petitioner was made known on 11.7.1983. In the background of these facts, the dispute between petitioner and respondent no.2 relates to the issue of seniority, in the sense that it is the case of the petitioner that the general results of the examination for B.Ed. held for the year 1982-83 were declared on 25.5.1983 and therefore the petitioner is senior to the respondent no.2 as the latter was appointed on 27.6.1983, i.e. after the date of declaration of general result of the said B.Ed. Examination. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner was already in the employment of the respondent no.1 prior to the appointment of the respondent no.2. On the other hand, it is the contention of the respondent no.2 that though the general results of B.Ed. Examination held for the year 1982-83 were declared on 25.5.1983, the result in respect of petitioner's performance was declared on 11.7.1983 much after the appointment of the respondent no.2 as a trained teacher and that therefore the respondent no.2 is senior to the petitioner.

(3.) In the year 1998, the respondent no.1 published the seniority list of its institution wherein the petitioner was shown to be senior to the respondent no.2 and consequently the same was objected to by the respondent no.2 by filing the revision application before the Regional Director of Municipal Administration, Nagpur. It is also to be noted that based on the said seniority list, declared in the year 1998, the petitioner was promoted to the post of Supervisor with effect from 01.09.2001. The same was also challenged by the respondent no.2 by the said revision application. The Regional Director of Municipal Administration vide its order dated 22/4/2003 set aside the seniority list fixed by the respondent no.1 and directed preparation of fresh seniority list in accordance with the provisions of law. The respondent no.3 by its order dated 6.9.2003 thereupon prepared a new seniority list wherein the petitioner was shown junior to the respondent no.2, on the basis of which the respondent no.1 by its order dated 27.9.2003 reverted the petitioner from the post of Supervisor to the post of assistant teacher, and hence the present petition.