1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.7626 OF 2010 1 The Head Master, Saraswati Vidyalaya, Parli Vaijnath, District Beed, Shri Mukund Dhondiba Maind, age: 57 years, Occ: service, R/o Parli Vaijnath, District Beed. 2 The President/Secretary, Saraswati Education Society, Parli Vaijnath, District Beed. Petitioners Versus 1 Vishal s/o Manchakrao Sathe, age: 29 years, Occ: teacher, R/o Vishal, Anand Nagar, Parli Vaijnath, Tq. Parli Vaijnath, District Beed. 2 The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Beed. Respondents Mr. Sachin Deshmukh, advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S.Deshmukh, advocate for Respondent No.1. Mr. K.J.Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent No.2. CORAM: R.M.BORDE, J. DATE : 29 th September, 2010. 2 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1 Heard Shri Sachin Deshmukh, learned Counsel for the petitioner, Shri R.S.Deshmukh, learned Counsel for Respondent No.1 and Shri K.J.Ghute Patil, learned A.G.P. for Respondent No.2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties. 2 The order dated 28.04.2010, passed by the School Tribunal, Aurangabad in Appeal No.1/2010, is subjected to challenge in the instant petition at the instance of employer. 3 The grievance of Respondent No.1-employee is that he was appointed by the School management by issuing appointment order on 14.11.2005. Initially the order of appointment was for three years. Respondent-employee has rendered services with the management till 15.06.2007, however, by issuing oral order, the Management has prohibited the employee – Respondent herein from rendering services. Initially, an application was made to the Grievance Committee making complaint of oral orders and same was allowed. The petitioner herein preferred writ petition raising exception to the order passed by the Grievance Committee, being Writ Petition No.1317/2009 wherein directions were given to the 3 Respondent-employee to file appropriate appeal to the School Tribunal for redressal of his grievance. Accordingly, Respondent- employee preferred appeal, being Appeal No.1/10 to the School Tribunal challenging the order of oral termination. The Management, in spite of service of notice, did not cause appearance and did not contest the appeal. The School Tribunal was pleased to allow the appeal and directed the Management to reinstate the employee with continuity and to pay him full back wages. 4 I have perused the order passed by the School Tribunal and heard arguments advanced by learned Counsel for respective parties. It is contended by the petitioner – Management that because of certain difficulties faced by the Management, proper attention was not given to the pending appeal and same was not contested. It is contended that there were disputes in the School Management, as a result of which, proper attention was not given to the pending appeal. The Management claims that there are proper defences available to the Management to resist the appeal and if an opportunity is extended, the Management would be in a position to demonstrate the circumstances supporting the order of termination. 5 Considering the nature of dispute, it is desirable to extend further opportunity to the Management to putforth their case before the School Tribunal. At the same time, it needs to be 4 taken into account that Respondent-employee is out of employment since 15.06.2007. A grievance is also made by the employee that while he was in service, he was not paid the wages. Respondent-employee is at liberty to avail of appropriate remedy for recovery of unpaid wages while he was rendering services with the Management. The fact that Respondent-employee is thrown out of employment since 15.06.2007 and is held to be entitled for full back wages cannot be over looked. 6 Learned Counsel appearing for petitioner – Management, on instructions, states that the School Management will deposit 50% of the amount towards back wages, which can be permitted to be withdrawn by the Respondent-employee. The approximate amount towards 50% back wages payable to the employee from 15.06.2007 comes to Rs.80,000/- (Rs.Eighty thousand). The School Management shall deposit Rs.80,000/- (Rs.Eighty thousand) towards 50% of the back wages payable to the employee with the School Tribunal. The amount be deposited within six weeks from today with the School Tribunal. On deposit of the same, Respondent-employee is permitted to withdraw the same. The fact of deposit of amount by the Management towards back wages shall be taken into consideration by the School Tribunal while disposing of the appeal, in pursuant to the directions issued in the instant petition. 7 For the reasons recorded above, the order passed by 5 the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal Aurangabad, on 28.04.2010 in Appeal No.1/2010, is quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the School Tribunal for rendering decision afresh. The School Tribunal shall decide the matter, after extending opportunity of hearing to both the sides, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within eight months from today. 8 Rule is accordingly made absolute. No order as to costs. (R.M.BORDE) JUDGE ******* adb/wp762610