Remanded

Mr. Sanjay Subhash Sangle v. President, Jamnaben Hirachand Ambani School, Lodhivali, Raigad and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Mar 2012WP/1265/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bench directed the Education Officer to inquire whether peons employed in a non-teaching capacity in a recognized unaided school qualify as employees under the MEPS Act and if dues were paid. Enquiry to be completed within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directing the Education Officer to inquire into the applicability of MEPS Act and payment of dues, and to complete the enquiry within six weeks.

Mr. Sanjay Subhash Sangle Vs President, Jamnaben… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

vss

¶2

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1265 OF 2012

¶5

Shri Sanjay Subhash Sangle ... Petitioner Vs. President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors. .... Respondents

¶6

a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1266 OF 2012

¶7

Shri Amol Kisan Sangle, Khalapur, Raighad ... Petitioner Vs. President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors. .... Respondents a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1267 OF 2012 Arun Tanaji Thanage ... Petitioner Vs. President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors. .... Respondents a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1268 OF 2012 Mangala Bajirao Potre ... Petitioner

¶8

1 of 6

¶9

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶10

Vs.
President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors.	.... Respondents
a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1269	OF 2012
Alka Tukaram Pandav ...	Petitioner
Vs.
President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors.	.... Respondents
a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1270	OF 2012
Vandana Bhivraj Thakur	... Petitioner
Vs.
President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors.	.... Respondents
a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1271	OF 2012
Shaila Shantaram Chavan	... Petitioner
Vs.
President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School
Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors.	.... Respondents

¶11

2 of 6

¶12

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶13

a/w WRIT PETITION NO.1272 OF 2012

¶14

Smt.Rajashree Rajendra Patkar ... Petitioner Vs. President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors. .... Respondents

¶15

AND WRIT PETITION NO.1273 OF 2012

¶16

Smt.Manjula Kashinath Jamdade ... Petitioner Vs. President Jamanben Hirachand Ambani School Lodhivali, Raigad & Ors. .... Respondents

¶17

Mr.Chandrakant Bidkar for the Petitioners

¶18

Mr.Milind Sathaye, Sr. Adv. a/w Ms.D’souza for Resp. Nos.1 & 2 Mr.P.P. Kakade, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5

¶19

CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR & N.M. JAMDAR, JJ.

¶20

DATED: MARCH 12, 2012 P.C.:

¶21

The grievance of the petitioners in these matters is that although they are working as peons i.e. the non-teaching staff in

¶22

3 of 6

¶23

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶24

the school of Respondent Nos.1 and 2, they have not been paid their dues/salary in accordance with the provisions of the MEPS Act. It is not in dispute that the respondent school is a recognised unaided school. Nevertheless, by virtue of section 3(1) of the MEPS Act, the provisions of the said Act are applicable to the respondent school. To get over this position, the respondent school through Counsel contends that the petitioners in each of these petitions were appointed on contract basis to do job work and not as employees of the school as such. It is however not in dispute that the petitioners were employed to discharge the work of peon. The fact whether the petitioners would be covered by the definition of “employee” u/s 2(7) of the MEPS Act or otherwise is a matter which will have to be addressed in first place and if so, the consequential question to be considered would be whether the petitioners have been paid their dues in accordance with the provisions of MEPS Act. Both these issues can be enquired into by the Education Officer of the area, Respondent No.3 herein.

¶25

In the circumstances, we dispose off these petitions on the following terms:

¶26

4 of 6

¶27

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶28

i) the Education Officer i.e. the Respondent No.3 shall enquire into the two questions referred to above on the basis of representation made by the petitioners after giving opportunity to all concerned.

¶29

ii) All questions in that behalf are left open to be decided by respondent No.3.

¶30

iii) The enquiry shall be conducted by the Education Officer as expeditiously as possible and in any case to be completed within six weeks from today.

¶31

iv) The petitioners as well as the representative of the respondent school shall participate in the said proceedings and extend full cooperation for early disposal thereafter.

¶32

v) They shall appear in the Office of the Respondent No.3 Education Officer on 19.3.2012 at 11 am on which date, the Education Officer may call upon the parties to submit all the relevant material in support of their

¶33

wp.1265.2012+.sxw

¶34

respective stand and assign suitable date when the parties can be heard so as to finally conclude the enquiry within the specified time.

¶35

The Petitions are disposed off on the above terms.

¶36

(N.M. JAMDAR, J.)

¶37

(A.M. KHANWILKAR,J.)

¶38

6 of 6

Mr. Sanjay Subhash Sangle v. President, Jamnaben Hirachand Ambani School, Lodhivali, Raigad and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Sanjay Subhash Sangle v. President, Jamnaben Hirachand Ambani School, Lodhivali, Raigad and Ors.

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

Clear Channel Communications India Pvt. Ltd. and Ors. Vs Aseem Gupta Additional Municipal Commissioner (Eastern Suburbs)

Mahabdi Trupti Shriram and 9 Ors. Vs Brihanmumbai Municipal Corpn. and 3 Ors.

Shelke Revansidha Mhalapppa Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Social Justice Dept and Ors.

Shriram Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shashikant Bhaidas Shirsat Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.

The Co-Operative Bank Employees Union and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary and Ors.