2024:BHC-AUG:9426 JUDGMENT – 3 MAY 2024 REPORTABLE IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7482 OF 2022

1. The President/Secretary Dhanvantari Medical &

Education Foundation, Datrange Mala, Ahmednagar.

2. Head Master Madhyamik Ashram Shala Davalpuri, Tq. Parner, Ahmednagar. …Petitioners ~ ~

Versus

1 Shri. Sangale Raosaheb Narayan Age : 47 years, Occu.: Nil, R/o Dhavalpur, Tal. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar.

2 The Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare Ahmednagar, Bolhegaon Phata, Ahmednagar.

…Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 12561 OF 2022 Ravsaheb Narayan Sangale Age : 48 years, Occu.: Nil, R/o Dhavalpuri, Tal. Parner, Dist. Ahmednagar. …Petitioner ~ Versus ~

1 The President/Secretary Dhanvantari Medical & Education Foundation, Datrange Mala, Ahmednagar.

2 Head Master Madhyamik Ashram Shala Davalpuri, Tq. Parner, Ahmednagar.

3 The Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare Ahmednagar, Bolhegaon Phata, Ahmednagar.

…Respondents APPEARANCES :

Advocate for the petitioners in WP- Mr. A. B. Gatne

7482/2022 and for Respondent No.1 and 2 in WP-12561/2022 Advocate for the Respondent No.1 in Mr. S. S. Jadhavar WP-7482/2022 and for petitioner in WP-12561/2022 AGP for the Respondent No.2/State Mr. Amar V. Lavte in WP-7482/2022 and for Respondent No.3 in WP-12561/2022 CORAM : SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.

Date On Which The Arguments Were Heard : 22 APRIL 2024 Date On Which The Judgment Is Pronounced : 3 MAY 2024 JUDGMENT :

. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard litigating sides finally at the admission stage.

2. In both the petitions, judgment and order dated 25.04.2022 passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Solapur in Appeal No.27/2017 is under challenge. I would refer to the papers of Writ Petition No.7482/2022 for the sake of convenience. It is preferred by the management against quashment of order of termination and direction to conduct fresh enquiry within six months by suspending respondent no.1. Writ Petition No.12561/2022 is filed by the respondent no.1/employee against direction to conduct fresh enquiry by suspending him, instead of granting him reinstatement with full back-wages.

3. Respondent no.1 was working as Kamathi in Ashram School run by the petitioner since 12.06.2006. He was permanent employee. He was found to be indulging into misconduct, negligence and absentees. He was issued with statement of allegations and charge-sheet vide letter dated 29.11.2016. An enquiry committee was constituted comprising of four members. It submitted report on 10.07.2017 to the management. Respondent no.1 was terminated by order dated 17.07.2017 with effect from 03.09.2016. Being aggrieved, respondent no.1 preferred appeal no.27/2017 before school tribunal. It was contested by the petitioners. By the impugned judgment and order, it was allowed partly on 25.04.2022.

4. It is held by the School Tribunal that there was non- compliance of provisions of Rule 36 (2)(3) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation, Rules of 1981 (hereinafter referred to as Rules for the sake of brevity). It is further held that there was breach of Rule 33 of Rules. The procedure contemplated by Rule 37(2)(a)(ii) of the Rules was not followed. It is further held that no sufficient opportunity was extended to cross- examine the witnesses. The grievance of the respondent no.1 or his representatives was not considered. It has been recorded that there was breach of Rule 37(4) (5) and (6) of the Rules.

5. It is held that there was no discussion amongst the members of the enquiry committee before submitting the report. It is further held that there was no recommendation for specific action to be taken against the delinquent. Ultimately disciplinary action was found to be in utter breach of statutory procedure. Hence, instead of reinstating respondent no.1, matter was remitted to the disciplinary authority to the stage from which it was vitiated. Management is given direction to conduct fresh enquiry by su