LOK SHIKSHAN SANSHTHA Vs. GAJANAN DEVIDAS DALAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With consent of parties the matters are taken up for final hearing immediately.

(2.) Writ Petition No. 2946 of 2007 is filed by the School Management against the judgment dated 26.09.2006 passed by the School Tribunal in appeal filed by respondent No.1 against his dismissal from the post of Head Master. The another Writ Petition no. 4831 of 2007 is filed by the Head Master against the Management challenging the clarificatory order passed by School Tribunal on 23.04.2007 whereby he was denied subsistence allowance. That writ petition is practically a consequence of the main petition, therefore, I will first deal with the judgment of the School Tribunal passed on 26.09.2006 which is challenged by the Management.

(3.) Respondent Gajanan Dalal was working as Head Master in a school run by the petitioner. The Management decided to hold an enquiry against him on several allegations including misappropriation. Accordingly Secretary of the Society served the copies of statement of allegations to the respondent. Thereafter a Committee for enquiry was constituted consisting of one member nominated by the Management, one member nominated by the respondent and one Member chosen by the President from the panel of the Head Masters on whom the State/National award was conferred. The Committee recorded evidence and held some meetings before beginning of the vacation and three meetings were held during the month of May 2004 i.e. during the Summer Vacation. Respondent was not present at the time of Meetings held during the month of May. His representative did not cross examine any of the witnesses examined by the Management nor he examined any defence witness on behalf of the respondent. On 14.05.2004 the inquiry committee submitted a report recommending the termination of services of the respondent and accordingly an order was issued by the Management terminating the services of the respondent. That order was challenged by the respondent before the School Tribunal and the School Tribunal set aside the termination order and also held that enquiry itself was vitiated mainly on two grounds. Firstly that the charge sheet was issued to the respondent, who was Head Master, by the Secretary of the Management and not by the President and secondly, enquiry was held during Summer Vacations without consent of the respondent in violation of the provisions of Rule 36 of the Maharashtra Employees Of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as Rules). It was also held that because enquiry was not properly held the respondent did not get proper opportunity to defend himself. In the result the School Tribunal allowed the appeal and quashed and set aside the dismissal order dated 28.05.2004 and remanded the matter back to the management for fresh enquiry as per the provisions of M. E. P. S. Act and Rules. School Tribunal also directed that meanwhile the appellant shall remain under suspension and be entitled to subsistence allowance. Hence this petition by the Management.