RAVINDRA V.GHUGE
Prajwala Bhatu Khalane – Appellant
Versus
Mahatma Phule Vidya Prasarak Sanstha, Deopur, Taluka and District Dhule – Respondent
1. Heard.
2. Rule.
3. By consent, Rule is made returnable forthwith and heard finally.
4. In the first petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 31.12.2014, delivered by the School Tribunal, by which, her Appeal No.77 of 2012 has been dismissed.
5. In the second petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.12.2014, by which his Appeal No.79 of 2012 has been dismissed by the School Tribunal.
6. In the third petition, the petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 31.12.2014, by which her Appeal No.78 of 2012 has been dismissed by the School Tribunal.
7. In all these Appeals, the petitioners were working as 'Shikshan Sevaks' and on the stroke of the completion of their probation period, all of them have been terminated.
8. The respondent/management is the same educational institution and the same college. Hence, by the consent of the parties, all these matters have been heard together.
9. For the sake of brevity, all the petitioners in these petitions are being referred to as the 'Teachers' and the respondent / institution is being referred to as the 'employer'.
10. I have heard the learned Advocates for the respect
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.