SUPRIYA SURYAKANT SIRSAT Vs. REKHA VIJAY KUMAR MURGORD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner-teacher is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 4/12/1996 passed by the School Tribunal at Kolhapur in her Appeal No.33 of 1992. The said appeal was partly allowed and she was directed to be reinstated in service. Her absence from 17/10/1992 was directed to be treated without pay. She is aggrieved by the later part of the order i.e. loss of backwages.

(2.) It was the petitioner's case that she was on medical leave from 8/10/1992 for eight days. However, when she went to report for duty on 17/10/92, she was not allowed to do so and thereafter Diwali vacation started. On 11/11/1992 after Diwali vacation when she went to report for duty, she was not allowed to resume. Hence she filed the appeal before the School Tribunal on or about 28/11/1992 contending that she was orally terminated from service. She had also pointed out that she had put in about 16 years of service as an Assistant Teacher in the primary section. She also referred to the show cause notice dated 7/10/92 and the order passed on the same date punishing her by stoppage of two annual increments.

(3.) The management filed its written statement and pointed out that there was no case of termination and on the contrary from 17/10/1992 onwards the appellant remained absent. She was issued with reminders calling upon her to report to duty and though such reminders were received by her, she did not bother to report to duty and, therefore, the appeal was required to be dismissed. The School Tribunal, after hearing both the parties recording a finding that even if the teacher had not reported for duty, the management was required to initiate appropriation disciplinary action and, therefore, the alleged termination under oral orders could not be sustained. Consequently the appellant was directed to be reinstated by denying the benefit of backwages from 17/10/92.