1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Letters Patent Appeal No. 466 of 2009 IN Writ Petition No. 5748 of 2007 [decided] [Shri Shivaji Education Society & another Vs. Presiding Officer, School Tribunal & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. P.B. Patil, Adv., for the appellants. Mr. S.P. Kadu, Adv., holding for Mr. Z.A. Haq, Adv., for respondent no.4. ----- CORAM : A.H. JOSHI AND R.K. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 18th January, 2010. 1. This appeal challenges the Judgment and order passed by the learned Single Judge of this Court on 15th September, 2009 in Writ Petition No. 5748 of 2007. 2. Heard Mr. P.B. Patil, learned counsel for the appellants and Mr. S.P. Kadu, learned counsel for respondent no.4. 3. Writ Petition filed by the respondent no.4 challenging the judgment and Order passed by the School Tribunal dated 11th October, 2007 dismissing the appeal challenging the supersession in the matter of promotion to the post of Principal, Polytechnic College run by 2 the respondent no.3 has been allowed. The order dated 9th July, 2007 issued by the Appellant- Society appointing one Shri S.K. Kitukale as officiating Principal has been set aside, and it is directed that the petitioner would be entitled to all the benefits to the post of Officiating Principal. 4. Shri Patil, the learned counsel appearing for the appellant, has urged that the appeal before the School Tribunal filed by the respondent no.4 was not maintainable in view of the Division Bench Judgment of this Court in case of Nagpur Shikshan Mandal & another Vs. Haribhau Nathuji Mohod & ors. [2008 (2) Mh.L.J. 457], wherein it has been held that the appeal challenging the promotion as an In-charge Principal is not maintainable under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools [Conditions of Service] Regulation Act, 1977. According to Mr. Patil, the learned Single Judge has, therefore, committed an error in allowing the Writ Petition filed by the respondent- employee and which ultimately results in allowing the appeal challenging the supersession in the matter of appointment of In-charge Principal. 5. A Preliminary Objection was raised as to maintainability of the appeal in earlier Writ Petition No. 3230 of 2007 between the same parties in respect of the same cause of action. The Division Bench of this Court, by its Judgment and order dated 31st July, 2007, has 3 taken a view that the appeal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools [Conditions of Service] Regulation Act, 1977 is maintainable, to challenge the supersession in the matter of promotion as In-charge Principal. This Judgment and order has become final and binding between the parties, as it has not been taken to the Apex Court. It is urged that there is a conflict in the views taken by two different Division Benches; one in Nagpur Shikshan Mandal's case [cited supra] and other by another Division Bench in Writ Petition No. 3230/2007 on 31st July, 2007. 7. Learned Single Judge in the impugned Judgment and Order has considered this aspect. Before the learned Single Judge. A specific plea was raised that in view of the Division Bench Judgment this Court in case of Nagpur Shikshan Mandal & another Vs. Haribhau Nathuji Mohod & ors. [2008 (2) Mh.L.J. 457], there is a conflicting view taken by the two Division Benches. The learned Single Judge has held that the earlier Judgment delivered in Writ Petition No. 3230 of 2007 is between the same parties and, therefore, the estoppel operates. In view of this, we need not go into the question whether there is such conflict or not. 8. We do not find any infirmity in the view taken by the learned Single Judge. 9. In that view of the matter, we do not find any substance in this appeal. The same is, 4 therefore, dismissed. Judge Judge |Hedau|