Grampanchayat of village Kauthuli. The Petitioner claims that for the period the said Respondent functioned as a Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat, drawing allowances and wages as Sarpanch of the Grampanchayat, he could not simultaneously draw salary as a teacher. As per the Petitioner, Respondent No.6 came to be elected as Sarpanch and the post of Sarpanch is full time post. Relying upon Rule 42 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools [Conditions of Service] Regulation Act, 1977, it is pleaded that Respondent No.6 was liable to obtain leave while acting as Sarpanch and during this period could not draw salary. The Rule in question permits an employee of a private school, with the previous permission of the management obtained in writing, to contest election to public officers other than those mentioned in Sub-Rule (1) and as per Clause (a) of Rule 5 for the period for which he holds office he has to take leave. It is pleaded that on a complaint made, an order dated 03.11.2008 was passed directing recovery of the salary received by Respondent No.6. As per pleading further made in the Writ Petition, Respondent No.6 sought review of the order passed directing recovery and taking cognizance whereof an order dated 19/22.12.2014 was passed setting aside earlier order directing the recovery to be made. From the response filed by Respondent No.6, it emerges that the post of Sarpanch was not a full time salary post as and when the Sarpanch attended meetings honorarium was paid. As per Respondent No.6, he attended meetings of the Grampanchayat after school hours. That honorarium received by Respondent No.6 has since been credited in the Treasury. The impugned order was preceded by communication dated 16.12.2014
