Back
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Amit Borkar, J
Atul Deepali Dinesh Naik – Appellant
Versus
Krantivir Chafekar Education Society – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. legality of the tribunal's order challenged (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding maintainability of appeal (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. jurisdiction limitations of the school tribunal (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. distinction between pay scale and promotion (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 5. appeal not maintainable under section 9 (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. court conclusions on entitlement vs. jurisdiction (Para 25 , 26) |
| 7. dismissal of writ petition due to jurisdictional issues (Para 27 , 28) |
| 8. finality of dismissal (Para 29 , 30) |
JUDGMENT:
1. By the present writ petition instituted under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner calls in question the legality and correctness of the Judgment and Order dated 20 November 2007 delivered by the School Tribunal in Appeal No. 106 of 2003. The supervisory and writ jurisdiction of this Court is invoked on the ground that the findings recorded by the Tribunal suffer from errors apparent on the face of the record and warrant judicial scrutiny.
2. The factual backdrop giving rise to the present proceedings may be stated thus. The petitioner came to be appointed as a Teacher in respondent No. 1 p
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
