Dismissed

Samarth Education Society and Ors. v. Shri.Vinay Dattatray Ghorpade and Others

Bombay HC24 Nov 2011LPA/392/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed the Letters Patent appeal holding that since the impugned order merely condoned delay allowing the school appeal to proceed on merits, entertaining the appeal would serve no useful purpose as the delay could be urged by the respondent later.

What did the court decide?

The civil application and appeal were disposed off without entertaining the appeal.

Samarth Education Society and Ors. Vs Shri.Vinay… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2011)

¶1

1 LPA24995/11

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

CIVIL APPLICATION NO.431 OF 2011

¶5

LETTERS PATENT APPEAL (L) NO.24995 OF 2011

¶6

 WRIT PETITION NO.3170 OF 2011

¶7

Samartha Education Society

¶8

and anr.

¶9

...Appellants

¶10

Vinay D. Ghorpade and others ...Respondents

¶11

Ms V.B. Mohite i/b Mr V.S. Talkute for Appellants.

¶12

None for Respondents.

¶13

CORAM : D.K. DESHMUKH AND ANOOP V. MOHTA JJ.
DATE : 24TH NOVEMBER 2011.

¶14

2 LPA24995/11

¶15

P.C.:-

¶16

1]This is an application filed for
condonation of delay in filing the appeal. The

¶17

delay is of 18 days. Therefore, we have heard the

¶18

learned counsel appearing for appellants on merits
to find out whether the appellants have prima facie

¶19

case. The appeal is directed against the order

¶20

passed by the learned Single Judge dated 15th July

¶21

2011 in writ petition No.3170 of 2011. That

¶22

petition was filed by the present respondent by name
Vinayak Ghorpade challenging the order of the School

¶23

Tribunal, Kolhapur rejecting his application for
condonation of delay in filing appeal before the
School Tribunal. He was working in a recognised
private school. His services were terminated and
therefore, he filed an appeal before the School

¶24

Tribunal under the Maharashtra Employees of Private
Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act 1977.

¶25

In the appeal, he filed an application for

¶26

condonation of delay. That application was rejected
by the School Tribunal. The learned Single Judge,

¶27

3 LPA24995/11

¶28

after perusing the record has found that provision

¶29

of section 5 of the Limitation Act the term

¶30

�sufficient cause� is to be liberally construed for
advancing justice and has therefore allowed the
petition and directed the School Tribunal to condone
the delay. The consequence of the order is that the
appeal filed by the respondent will now be heard on

¶31

merits. In our opinion, as by the order impugned in
the appeal merely delay in filing appeal before the

¶32

School Tribunal is condoned, it will not be
appropriate to entertain the appeal. The learned
counsel appearing for appellants submitted that the
appeal was filed before the School Tribunal after
almost a year of the termination. In our opinion,

¶33

though the delay in filing appeal is condoned, the
ground that the appellant took before the School
Tribunal took a long time to challenge the
termination order can be a ground that can be urged
by the respondents before the School Tribunal in

¶34

support of their case that no relief should be
granted to the appellant before the School Tribunal.
In this view of the matter therefore, no useful

¶35

4 LPA24995/11

¶36

purpose will be served by condoning the delay.

¶37

Civil application and appeal are therefore disposed
off.

¶38

Parties to act on the copy of this order
duly authenticated by the Sheristedar / Private
Secretary of this Court.

¶39

Certified copy expedited.

¶40

( JUSTICE ANOOP V. MOHTA )

Samarth Education Society and Ors. v. Shri.Vinay Dattatray Ghorpade and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Samarth Education Society and Ors. v. Shri.Vinay Dattatray Ghorpade and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dhutum Grampanchayat Vs M/S Iot Infrastructure and Energy Services Ltd. and Anr.

Dhutum Grampanchayat Vs M/S Iot Infrastructure and Energy Services Ltd. and Anr.

M/S. Isi Bars Ltd. Vs Virendrakumar Gaund

Zohar N. Aga Vs Rehana Z. Aga

Sharadchandra Ganesh Mulay Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Ladakbhai Janyabhai Mishal Vs Shri. Kamlakar Govindbhai Kharpadia and Ors.