Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, UDAY UMESH LALIT, JJ.
CHANDRASHEKHAR ANANDRAOJI REWATKAR - Appellants
Vs.
NAVJEEVAN SHIKSHAN SANSTHA AND ORS - Respondents
CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).842-843 of 2017
Decided on : 23-01-2017
Appointment - School Tribunal's Order - The court reinstated the appellant as an Assistant Teacher after finding that the School Tribunal's order, which allowed the appellant's appeal and reinstated him with continuity of services and backwages, was set aside by the High Court on the ground of failure to produce the advertisement. The court held that the finding of the School Tribunal could not have been set aside without any basis, only on the ground that the appellant failed to produce the advertisement.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on probation and later had his services dispensed with. He approached the School Tribunal, which allowed the appeal and reinstated him with continuity of services and backwages. The High Court set aside the School Tribunal's order on the ground that the appellant could not produce the advertisement in pursuance of which he was appointed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant's appointment was after the prior permission of the Education Department and in pursuance of the selection after an advertisement. The court reinstated the appellant and set aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court, restoring the Order of the School Tribunal. The appellant was allowed to join service within a period of two months, but was not entitled to any backwages.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the appellant's appointment and the decision of the School Tribunal being set aside by the High Court based on the failure to produce the advertisement.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the finding of the School Tribunal could not have been set aside without any basis, only on the ground that the appellant failed to produce the advertisement. The court reinstated the appellant based on the undisputed service period and the finding of the School Tribunal.
Final Decision: The court allowed the appeals, set aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court, and restored the Order of the School Tribunal. The appellant was allowed to join service within a period of two months, but was not entitled to any backwages.
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
These appeals have been preferred against judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench on 4th September, 2014 and 7th October, 2015 in W.P.No.5455 of 2005 and Misc. Civil Application ST No.23162 of 2014 in W.P.No.5455 of 2005 respectively. The appellant was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on probation on 6th July, 1999 by Sadhbhawna Bahu Uddeshya Shikshan Sanstha which was running the school in question at the relevant point of time. The management of the school was later on transferred to respondent no.1-Navejeevan Shikshan Santha some time in the year 2001 and thereafter on 23rd June, 2004 the services of the appellant were dispensed with orally. On 21st September, 2004, the appellant approached the School Tribunal under the provisions of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. The Tribunal vide order dated 8th August, 2005 allowed the appeal and reinstated the appellant with continuity of services and backwages. The High Court set aside the said order, mentioned above, on the ground that the appellant could not produce the advertisement in pursuance of which he was appointed.
3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at some length.
4. It is undisputed that the appellant served for more than five years and the School Tribunal recorded a finding that the appointment of the appellant was after the prior permission of the Education Department and in pursuance of the selection after an advertisement. The said finding could not have been set aside without any basis, only on the ground that the appellant failed to produce the advertisement.
5. Accordingly, we allow these appeals, set aside the judgment and order passed by the High Court and restore the Order of the School Tribunal. No costs.
6. The appellant may be allowed to join service within a period of two months. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct that the appellant will not be entitled to any backwages.
7. Applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
