Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
GAURI GODSE
Panchashil Primary School – Appellant
Versus
Nanda Balasaheb Shinde – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. tribunal sets aside 2006 termination, orders reinstatement. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. 2012 termination set aside, strict departmental action directed. (Para 4 , 5) |
| 3. non-compliance with reinstatement despite no stay. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12) |
| 4. petitioners argue prejudice irrelevant, evidence reappreciation improper. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. respondent defends tribunal on prejudice, no evidence of refusal. (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22) |
| 6. inquiry vitiated by unframed charges, prejudice. (Para 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 7. no evidence of employee refusal; deemed termination. (Para 32 , 33) |
| 8. tribunal interferes on natural justice breach; hc review sparing. (Para 34 , 35) |
| 9. writs dismissed; no interference warranted. (Para 36 , 37 , 38) |
| 10. enforce compliance; contempt for non-adherence. (Para 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44) |
JUDGMENT :
GAURI GODSE, J.
1. The Writ Petition No. 3267 of 2007 is filed by the school and the management to challenge the order passed by the school tribunal on 16th March 2007, allowing the appeal filed by respondent no. 1 (teacher) to challenge the termination order dated 26th May 2006. The school tribunal has set aside th
Under Article 227, High Court cannot interfere with school tribunal's setting aside of prejudiced disciplinary inquiry where findings mismatch framed charges, absent perversity or natural justice vio....
Allegations against an employer must be substantiated; failure to do so can result in justified dismissal for misconduct.
Tribunal has exceeded its jurisdiction by setting aside the dismissal order of the respondent No.1 in view of the charges, which were proved against him.
The main legal point established is the requirement for fair and just enquiry proceedings in cases of termination, ensuring the principles of natural justice are upheld.
The inquiry against the employee was invalidated due to bias, emphasizing the necessity of impartiality and the burden on the employer to prove non-employment for back wages.
Point of Law - In view of the above provisions of the Act, 1972 it emerges that due to fault of the management of the School the petitioner cannot be penalized by not granting the protection under Se....
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
