1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by the consent of the parties and heard finally.

2. The petitioner/employee is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 22-12-2011 delivered by the School Tribunal whereby his Appeal No. 57 of 2002 has been dismissed.

3. The said Appeal was earlier dismissed by judgment and order dated 14-10-2010 which was quashed and set aside by this Court by its order dated 06-04-2011 passed in Writ Petition No. 11668 of 2010. The appeal was restored on 28-04-2011 and was reheard.

4. The contentions of the petitioner in the light of the memo of admitted facts dated 28-01-2015 and oral submissions are summarised as under :-

a] The petitioner has acquired the degree of Master of Arts and Bachelor of Education (M.A.B.Ed.)

b] He was appointed on 15-07-1991 as a secondary school teacher.

c] The petitioner and the respondent-management are covered by the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (here-in-after referred to as the “ MEPS Act”) and the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (here-in-after referred to as the “ M.E.P.S. Rules”).

d] On 20-12-2001, the petitioner was placed under suspension.

e] The suspension order does not indicate that the petitioner was under an obligation or was ordered to mark his attendance in the school premises on the attendance register as a precondition for earning his suspension allowance.

f] The resolution to suspend the petitioner was passed on 26-11-2001 which does not mention that the petitioner would not earn his suspension allowance if he did not mark his presence each day in the school attendance register.

g] A final show-cause notice was issued on 14-12-2001.

h] The petitioner received the said notice on 19-01-2002.

i] The petitioner replied to the show cause notice on 22-01-2002.

j] Before the petitioner received the notice and before he could submit his reply, the management arrived at a decision to conduct an enquiry and issued the letter for initiating an enquiry on 06-01-2002.

k] A notice dated 06-01-2002 was issued to the petitioner to appoint his nominee on the enquiry committee.

l] By letter dated 07-02-2002, the petitioner appointed his nominee on the enquiry committee.

m] The charge sheet dated 25-02-2002 was issued to the petitioner setting out the charges as under :-

i] Not residing within the head quarters.

ii] Not following the time table.

iii] Creating a discord amongst the teachers.

iv] defamed the school in a newspaper interview.

v] Not accepting communication from the management.

n] The petitioner replied to the charge sheet on 05-03-2002 which was accompanied with several documents in support of his case.

o] On 23-03-2002 the petitioner informed the enquiry committee that his nominee had developed cold feet and thus withdrew himself as his nominee on the enquiry committee. He prayed for eight days time to nominate a new nominee.

p] Despite the above, the management continued with the enquiry without permitting the petitioner to nominate his nominee on the committee and recorded his evidence on the same day 23-03-2002.

q] The enquiry was conducted by only two members.

r] The enquiry report was submitted on 15-04-2002.

s] The petitioner was terminated from employment on 19-04-2002.

t] The management had decided to conduct the enquiry without considering the reply of the petitioner in violation of Rule 33 of the Rules.

u] The enquiry was continued in the absence of the petitioner's representative, despite having intimated to the employer that the nominee earlier appointed had backed out.

v] The application dated 23-03-2002 seeking permission to appoint a nominee on the enquiry committee was not considered by the management as well as the enquiry committee.

w] Suspension allowance was not paid to the petitioner thereby weakening his defence.

x] Stale, Vague and ambiguous charges have been levelled only to victimise the petitioner.

y] Two additional charges at clause Nos. 6 and 7 were suo-mo