Quashed

Adarshi Shikshan Rasarka Mandal v. Madhukant Sahebrao Thokal and Others

Bombay HC2 May 2012WP/2326/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad quashed and set aside the School Tribunal's order imposing a penalty on a Permanent Teacher who had secured employment with the Municipal Council, Barshi, dismissing the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

The order passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad, on 07.05.1992 is quashed and set aside.

Adarshi Shikshan Rasarka Mandal Vs Madhukant Sahebrao… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

wp232692.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2326 OF 1992

¶5

1 Shri Adarsha Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Loni, Tq. Paranda,
District Osmanabad, through its
President.
2 Shri Adarsha Shikshan Prasarak
Mandal, Loni, Tq. Paranda,
District Osmanabad, through its
Secretary.
3 Head Master,
Shri Dnyaneshwar Prashala,
Loni, Tq. Paranda,
District Osmanabad.	Petitioners
Versus
1 Madhukant Sahebrao Thokal, age: 28 years, Occ: service, H.No.1078, Raut Galli, Kasba Peth,
Barshi, District Solapur.
2 Bharat Ethapay,	} Dismissed as against
Physical Teacher,	} Respondents No.2 & 3
Shri Sant Dnyaneshwar Prashala,	} vide Additional
Loni, At & Post Loni,	} Registrar's order dated
Tq.Paranda, District Osmanabad.	} 02.11.1992. }
3 The Education Officer,	}
Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad.	} Respondents

¶6

Mr.K.B.Raghu, advocate holding for Mr.A.S.Golegaonkar, advocate for the petitioners.

¶7

Mr. R.D.Mane, advocate for Respondent No.1.

¶8

Dismissed against Respondents No.2 & 3 vide Additional Registrar's order dated 02.11.1992.

¶9

wp232692.odt

¶10

{2}

¶11

CORAM : R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 02nd May, 2012.

¶12

ORAL JUDGMENT:

¶13

1 Shri Mane, advocate for Respondent No.1, on instructions, informs that after admission of the instant petition and grant of interim relief, Respondent No.1-employee has secured employment with Municipal Council, Barshi and at present he is permanent employee of the said Municipal Council.

¶14

2 In this view of the matter, the order passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad, on 07.05.1992 deserves to be quashed and set aside and same is accordingly quashed and set aside.

¶15

3 Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs.

¶16

R.M.BORDE

¶17

JUDGE

¶18

adb/wp232692

Adarshi Shikshan Rasarka Mandal v. Madhukant Sahebrao Thokal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Adarshi Shikshan Rasarka Mandal v. Madhukant Sahebrao Thokal and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Hirabai Uttamrao Mahale. Vs Vithal Goverdhan Gondhale and Another.

Rama Loha Mhaske. Vs Manik Arjuna Trimbakappa and Others.

Vaishali Baburao Shinde Vs Union of India through General Manager, Central Rly.

Waman Shankar Londhe. Vs the Muncipal Council ,Jalgaon.

The State of Maharashtra and Others. Vs Zilla Raste and Imarati Wa Patbandhare K.Union.andORS.

Sattar Gafoor Sarvaiyya Vs Habib Noorulla Khan and Anr.