Petitioners, appointed as teachers in 2002 and approved in 2004, challenge their exclusion from the muster roll and non-payment of salary following an inquiry report declaring their appointment illegal. They seek a direction to the education authorities to regularize their service.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
dgm 1
25wp944513.sxw
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 9445 OF 2013
Shri Satish Baburao Lokhande and anr.
….Petitioners
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and 4 others ….Respondents
Mr. G.M. Savagave for the Petitioners. Ms. S.S. Bhende, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND C.V. BHADANG, JJ.
DATE : 13.01.2015
P.C.:
By this Petition, the Petitioners seek a direction to the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 to permit the Petitioners to sign the muster roll and also pay the regular salary to the Petitioners.
It is the case of the Petitioners that though the Petitioners were appointed in the year 2002 and though the Education Officer had granted approval to the appointment of the Petitioners in the year 2004, the Education conducted an inquiry and held that the appointment of the Petitioners was illegal. According to the Petitioners, in view of the inquiry report, the Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 are not permitting the Petitioners to sign on the muster roll and the salary of the Petitioners is also not paid.
1/2
dgm 2 25wp944513.sxw
If the Petitioners are not permitted to sign the muster roll and if they are not paid salary, it is a case of “otherwise termination”. The Petitioners can challenge their termination by filing an Appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. In view of the effective alternative remedy, the writ petition would not be tenable.
In view of the aforesaid, we dismiss the writ petition by keeping the points in the Petition open. No costs.
(C.V. BHADANG, J.) (VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
2/2
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can intervene to permit signing of muster roll and payment of salary where an alternative remedy exists.
Whether the writ petition is maintainable in view of the availability of appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977.
Whether the holding of an illegal appointment inquiry by the Education Department bars the grant of relief under Article 226 of the Constitution.
Shri Satish Baburao Lokhande and anr.
The State of Maharashtra
4 others
Vasanti A. Naik
C. V. Bhadang
C. V. Bhadang
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
