Dismissed

Sudam S/O Kondiba Darade v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of Education Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC18 Mar 2015WP/2211/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a teacher whose school was derecognized, filed a writ petition claiming unpaid salary from 1998 to 2011. The Court held the claim time-barred as monetary relief is limited to three preceding years and dismissed the petition.

What did the court decide?

None; the writ petition was dismissed with no order as to costs.

Sudam S/O Kondiba Darade Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of Education Mumbai and Others — Bombay HC (2015) — LawSathi Research

¶1

1/2

¶2

wp2211.1 4

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2211 OF 2014

¶5

Sudam S/o Kondiba Darade

¶6

-vs-

¶7

State of Mah.and others

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of

¶9

Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶10

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶11

Mr.M.V.Bute, counsel for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr.N.Rao, AGP for the respondent No2.1 and 2. Mr.N.Kalwaghe, counsel for Respondent Nos.3, 3(ii), 3(iii),3(v),3(vi),3(vii),3(viii),3(ix), 3(x) and 3(xi). Mr.S.U.Bhuyar, counsel for the respondent Nos.3(i) and (iv).

¶13

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M.BADAR, JJ.

¶14

DATE : 18.03.2015.

¶15

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent-Management to pay the salary to the petitioner for the period from 1998 to 2011.

¶16

It appears that the school is derecognized in the year 2011 and it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has not been paid the salary from the period from 1998 to 2011.

¶17

Shri Kalwaghe, the learned counsel for the respondent Nos.3, 3(ii), 3(iii),3(v),3(vi),3(vii),3(viii),3(ix), 3(x) and 3(xi), states that the petitioner is the real brother of the President of the Society and the petitioner was illegally appointed and it is most likely that the petitioner must not have worked on the post.

¶18

In any case, it would not be possible for this Court to direct the Management to pay the salary to the petitioner, as the claim made by the petitioner is time barred.

¶19

2/2

¶20

wp2211.1 4

¶21

The petitioner is seeking the salary from the year 1998 to 2011 and the petition has been filed in the year 2014. It is well settled that a claim for monetary relief could be made for a period of three years preceding the date of filing of the petition. Since the claim in the instant case is time barred, the relief cannot be granted.

¶22

In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶23

JUDGE JUDGE

¶24

KHUNTE

Sudam S/O Kondiba Darade v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of Education Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sudam S/O Kondiba Darade v. State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, Department of Education Mumbai 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

Shri Narayan S/O Parasram Meshram, Deceased through Lrs Kalpana Narayan Meshram and Others Vs Smt. Sheetal Wd/O Vinay Meshram and Another

Archana W/O Sunil Kale Vs Sunil S/O Rameshrao Kale

Archana W/O Sunil Kale Vs Sunil S/O Rameshrao Kale

Shri Arvind Shrawan Kashiwar and Others Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Tribal Development, Mumbai and Others

Ravidayal S/O Ishwardayal Patle Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, Ministry of General Administration, Mumbai

Shankarrao S/O Madhorao Nakade Vs the State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary Revenue and Forest Department, Mumbai and 2 Others