Dismissed

Jyotshna D/O. Chhabilal Ahire v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Jun 2019WP/7054/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought reinstatement as a teacher after criminal acquittal on fabrication charges. The court dismissed the petition, holding that lack of qualification from a recognized institute was the valid ground for termination unrelated to the criminal charge.

What did the court decide?

Prayer for reinstatement to the post of Assistant Teacher dismissed.

Jyotshna D/O. Chhabilal Ahire Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

Sequeira

¶2

1 10 WP 7054-2016.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 7054 OF 2016.

¶5

Jyotshna D/o. Chhabilal Ahire Vs State of Maharashtra and others

¶6

.. Petitioner

¶7

.. Respondents

¶8

Mr.Sudhir I. Nandode, for the Petitioner.

¶9

Mr.M.M.Pabale – Additional Government Pleader, for Respondent No.1.

¶10

CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, C.J. & N.M.JAMDAR, J. Date : 7 June, 2019.

¶11

P.C. :

¶12

The Petitioner seeks reinstatement to the post of Assistant Teacher from which he was terminated by the Zilla Parishad Thane, on 12 February 2001.

¶13

The Petitioner had filed a Writ Petition in the year 2002 challenging his termination. He withdrew that Writ Petition and filed a departmental appeal. The Appeal was dismissed by the Appellate authority, on 4 July 2003. Then the Petitioner filed a Writ Petition No.9417 of 2003 which was dismissed by the learned Single

¶14

2 10 WP 7054-2016.doc

¶15

Judge. Letters Patent Appeal filed by the Petitioner was dismissed on 24 July 2008. Apart from the departmental proceedings, prosecution was launched against the Petitioner on the ground that he had produced fabricated Course Certificate. The criminal prosecution resulted in acquittal of the Petitioner on 20 November 2015.

¶16

Based on the order of acquittal, the Petitioner contends that, now since he stands honorably acquitted, the Petitioner should be reinstated in service.

¶17

Firstly, the order of the learned Magistrate acquitting the Petitioner is based on lack of evidence and by extending the benefit of doubt. Secondly, the Petitioner had already challenged his order of termination which was passed on the ground that he was not qualified to be appointed. Both, the learned Single Judge and the Division bench, had recorded the admitted position that the Petitioner had not obtained qualification from a recognised Institute.

¶18

May be that the Petitioner stands acquitted from the charge of fabrication, but for the lack of any requisite qualifications, the prayer of the Petitioner for reinstatement cannot be granted. In the circumstances, Writ Petition is dismissed.

¶19

N.M.JAMDAR, J.

¶20

CHIEF JUSTICE

Jyotshna D/O. Chhabilal Ahire v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyotshna D/O. Chhabilal Ahire v. the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.

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

Khajagee Prathamik Shikshak Sevak Samittee and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Khajajee Prathamik Shikshak Sevak Samittee and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Khajajee Prathamik Shikshak Sevak Samitee and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Dr. G.P. Bhawane Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Dept. of Higher and Technical Education and Ors.

Dr. G.P. Bhawane Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Dept. of Higher and Technical Education and Ors.

Shri. Vijay Mahadev Kaparekar and Anr. Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Ors.