SUBHASH GULABRAO KHANDARE Vs. SANT GADGEBABA AMRAVATI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with consent of the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respective parties.

(2.) By way of present petition, the petitioner challenges the order dated 20.08.2015 passed by the learned Presiding Officer of University and College Tribunal, Nagpur (hereinafter referred as the "Tribunal" for the sake of brevity) thereby rejecting the application seeking condonation of delay caused in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.

(3.) It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Principal in the College namely Arts and Commerce College, Ralegaon run by respondent No.2 in the year 1996. The management of the said College was handed over to the administrator under the orders of this Court. Subsequently, the management was transferred to one Unique Education Society. In the year 2010, the petitioner was charged with the allegation of misappropriation of funds and was suspended on 25.03.2010. On 10.07.2010, the suspension of the petitioner was withdrawn. The management of Unique Education Society and the management of the Orchid Education Society/respondent No.2 in a joint meeting passed resolution to handover the management of the Arts and Commerce College to respondent No.2 i.e. Orchid Education Society. The petitioner was raising grievance in respect of transfer of the management and though he sought information, the information was not provided to him. In the year 2011, the respondent No.2 sought permission from respondent No.1/ Sant Gadge Baba University, Amravati (hereinafter referred to as the University for the sake of brevity) and the University refused the permission. In the second attempt also, the University refused the permission sought for by the respondent No.2/Society. Ultimately, in the year 2013, the respondent No.1 allowed the proposal of termination of the petitioner. Accordingly, on 18.12.2013, the order of termination was issued. It is submitted that though the petitioner wanted to challenge the order immediately by filing the appeal before the Tribunal, due to non availability of Tribunal till September, 2014, the petitioner could not file the appeal and ultimately on 08th October, 2014, the petitioner filed an appeal before the Tribunal with an application seeking condonation of delay. The application was opposed by the respondent No.2. The learned Presiding Officer of the Tribunal could not find favour with the grounds raised by the petitioner in the application seeking condonation of delay mainly on the ground raised by the petitioner that he could not receive the necessary documents so as to file the appeal the delay was caused, rejected the application. The Tribunal found that all the necessary documents were supplied to the petitioner. The Tribunal also rejected the application on the ground that the petitioner made certain statements which were contrary to record by observing that the discretion cannot be used in favour of the petitioner.