Dismissed

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje v. the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Bhandara and 3 Others

Bombay HC25 Mar 2015WP/7212/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a terminated Headmaster, sought a direction for action against school trustees for removing records and acceptance of examination forms. The Court dismissed the writ petition as internal trust disputes fall under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, not writ jurisdiction. The second prayer was rendered moot by the completion of examinations.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs.

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje Vs the Education… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

2503wp7212.14.odt

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.7212/2014

¶5

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje

¶6

...Versus...

¶7

The Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Bhandara and others

¶8

¶9

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶10

Court's or Judge's orders

¶11

¶12

Shri B.M. Kharkate, Advocate for petitioner Mrs. T.D. Khade, Advocate for respondent no.2 Ms P.A. Mahashabde, Advocate for respondent nos.3 and 4

¶13

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 25.03.2015

¶14

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent no.1 - Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Bhandara to initiate action against the respondent nos.3 and 4 for illegally removing the records from the registered office of the School where the petitioner is working as a Headmaster. The petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondent no.2 – Board to accept the examination forms of the students.

¶15

It appears that there are two groups in the Management and one of the groups in the Management has terminated the services of the petitioner as a Headmaster. Instead of challenging the order of termination, the petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction to the Education Officer to take action against the respondent nos.3 and 4, when respondent no.3 is admittedly the trustee whose name appears on

¶16

2503wp7212.14.odt

¶17

¶18

Schedule – I, for removing the records from the registered office of the School. When it is the case of the respondent nos.3 and 4 that the services of the petitioner are terminated, the petitioner cannot seek a direction for action against the respondent nos.3 and 4 in respect of the School records as admittedly the respondent no.3 is a trustee. If there is a dispute in the Management, the parties can avail the remedy under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act. It would not be proper for this Court to decide the dispute between the factions in the Trust in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. Also, it is stated on behalf of the respondent no.2 that the 10^th standard examination is already over and the second prayer clause would not survive. Also, it is stated on behalf of the respondent nos.3 and 4 that the students have already appeared at the examination.

¶19

In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.

¶20

JUDGE JUDGE

¶21

Wadkar

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje v. the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Bhandara and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje v. the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Bhandara and 3 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

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke Vs State of Maharshtra Its Secretary Dept. of School Education Mumbai and 3 Others

Mr. Virendra Shankarrao Chopde Vs Director, Social Welfare Directorate, State of Maharashtra, Pune and 4 Others

Vijay S/O Wasudevrao Shende Vs State of Maharashtra, Department of Urban Development Thr. Its Principal Secretary and 2 Others

Shri Sanjay S/O Vasant Sonune Vs State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Education Department, Mumbai

Diwakar S/O Marotrao Chaple Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Department of Education, Mumbai and Others

Vivek Shrikrishna Fokmare Vs Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Amravati and Others