Allowed

Shri. More Rajendra Ashokrao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, School, Education Dept. and Ors.

Bombay HC13 Sept 2015WP/8330/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court set aside an order terminating the petitioner's employment as Assistant Teacher without prior notice. The petition was allowed, and the respondent was directed to release withheld salary within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Quash impugned order dated 7 August 2014; direct respondent to release withheld salary within six weeks.

Shri. More Rajendra Ashokrao Vs State of Maharashtra… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

22wp8330.14.sxw

¶2

ssm 1

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 8330 OF 2014

¶6

Shri More Rajendra Ashokrao ….Petitioner.

¶7

Vs.

¶8

State of Maharashtra & Ors.

¶9

….Respondents.

¶10

Mr. J.G. Reddy (Aradwad) for the Petitioners. Mr. V.N. Sagare, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. Mr. R.S. Alange for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

¶11

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 15 SEPTEMBER 2015.

¶12

ORDER:

¶13

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

¶14

Heard finally, by consent of the parties.

¶15

2 We are inclined to dispose of this Writ Petition, as

¶16

admittedly no show cause notice was given, as contemplated under the basic principles of natural justice, before passing the impugned order, whereby the Petitioner's services were terminated by withdrawing the approval, which was granted initially as “Shikshan Sevak” and later on as “Assistant Teacher” . The Petitioner is working

¶17

1/3

¶18

ssm 2 22wp8330.14.sxw

¶19

since 1 September 2010 and still in service. Therefore, in view of the orders passed by this Court in various matters including, Writ Petition No. 9477 of 2013 and other connected matters dated 24 April 2015, we are disposing of the present Writ Petition.

¶20

3 Impugned order dated 7 August 2014 passed by Respondent No.2Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Solapur is quashed and set aside. Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (b). The concerned Respondent to release the salary, if it is withheld, based upon the impugned order, as early as possible, preferably within six weeks from today, by following due procedure of law. All points are kept open

¶21

4 Rule made absolute accordingly.

¶22

5 There shall be no order as to costs.

¶23

(A.A. SAYED, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

2/3

22wp8330.14.sxw

ssm 3

CERTIFICATE

Certified to be true and correct copy of the Original signed

¶29

Judgment/Order.

¶30

3/3

Shri. More Rajendra Ashokrao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, School, Education Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri. More Rajendra Ashokrao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, School, Education Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Solanki Vipul Natavarlal Vs Director General of R.P.F., Railway Board and Ors.

Pankaj Manikrao Salave through Natural Guardian Father Manikrao G. Salave Vs Directorate of Technical Education and Ors.

M/S. Hotel Western Beach through Its Sole Proprietor Vijay Patil Vs Municipal Corporation of the City of Vasai-Virar

Shri. More Rajendra Ashokrao Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Principal Secretary, School, Education Dept. and Ors.

Sau. Jyoti Rajesh Tiwari Vs Mahatma Gandhi Hindi Vidyalaya, Ranjnoli Bhiwandi, through Principal and Ors.

Miss Naurin Mohammed Rafik Nerli Since Minor, through Her Father Mohammed Rafik Gous Nerli Vs Union Territory of Dadra and Nagar Haveli through Its Administrator and Ors.