1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR M.C.A. NO. 261/2010 IN C.R.A. NO. 19/2007 (Waman Shamraoji Wagh & others VERSUS The New Model Literary & Industrial Education Society) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri R.N. Badhe h/f Shri N.S. Badhe, counsel for the applicants. Shri M.Y. Wadodkar, counsel for the R-1 & 2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 8, 2010 . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned counsel for the applicants states that it was not the case of the applicant in the plaint that his services were terminated by the management and, therefore, he did not have any remedy under the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and the judgment reported in 2007(1) Mh.L.J. 597 (St. Ulai High School & another Versus Devendraprasad Jagannath Singh) cannot be made applicable to the facts of his case. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the plaint pleadings, it is clear that though the plaintiff had not actually used the word ‘terminated’ in the 2 plaint, the plaintiff had clearly stated that he was not permitted to join his duties when he went to the school to join his duties and that he could not have removed from the service without following the due procedure of law. These statements of facts made in paragraphs 4 and 10 of the plaint, clearly show that the services of the plaintiff-applicant were otherwise terminated and he had a remedy before the School Tribunal under the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. Since the plaint pleadings and the law laid down by this Court in the judgment reported in 2007(1) Mh.L.J. 597 (St. Ulai High School & another Versus Devendraprasad Jagannath Singh)clearly showed that the Civil Court did not have jurisdiction to entertain the suit, it appears that the present review application has been mischievously filed by the applicant for the reasons best known to him and, hence, the same is dismissed with costs of Rupees Five Thousand. JUDGE APTE