1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.3413 OF 2009 Archana Krushna Rane PETITIONER V E R S U S The President, Vidya Prasarak Manda, Koparvali, Tq. Yaval, Dist. Jalgaon and 5 others. RESPONDENTS. Mr.A.G. Talhar, Advocate for the petitioner. Surekha Mahajan,advocate for the respondent Nos. 1,2 and 4. Varsha Kapse, Advocate for respondent No.3. Mr. S.N. Kendre, A.G.P for R-5 and 6. CORAM : S. B. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 22nd FEBRUARY, 2010. PER COURT :- 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, advocate appearing for respondent Nos.1 to 4, learned A.G.P for respondent No.5 and 6. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 3. Today only I have heard learned counsel for respective parties in civil application No.10435/2009. This civil application was filed by the present petitioner seeking amendment to the prayer clause of the writ petition. Said application has been allowed by this court after hearing the parties. Present petitioner was applicant in this civil application. Petitioner is directed to carry out amendment within one week and place on record amended copy of the writ petition. 4. With the assistance of both the learned counsels, I have seen record and proceeding. Counsel appearing for the petitioner has given some 2 dates. According to him, present petitioner was appointed on 22.07.2005 as ‘Shikshan Sevak’ by the respondent Management. On 25.07.2005 proposal for approval of the appointment of present teacher was submitted by the Management to Education Officer, concerned. Thereafter, respondent No.4 in this writ petition has filed writ petition No.5705/2005 in this Court. Said writ petition was considered by the learned Division Bench of this Court, which came to be allowed and disposed of with direction. Copy of order in said writ petition is on record. Counsel for the petitioner submits that there after in view of the order passed by the learned Division Bench of this Court in writ petition No. 5075/2005, Education Officer concerned has granted approval for the period of three years. This period is commencing from 22.07.2005 till 22.07.2008. However, respondent-Management terminated the service of the present petitioner on 29.12.2006. This order was challenged by the present petitioner before grievance Committee constituted in accordance with the Government Resolution to consider the grievances of Shikshan Sevak. Grievance Committee had passed interim order and directed to keep one post vacant. This direction was given against the respondent-Management. Thereafter respondent- Management filed its reply. Counsel for the petitioner submits that this interim relief granted by the Grievance Committee on 01.07.2007 was continued from time to time and no objection was raised on behalf of the respondent- Management. Thereafter grievance committee disposed of appeal holding that it has no jurisdiction, granted continuation of interim relief for the period of six weeks. Thereafter petitioner filed appeal before learned Presiding Officer School Tribunal Nashik and applied for interim relief. Said application is rejected. 5. Petitioner has filed present writ petition on 09.06.2009. With the 3 assistance of counsel for the parties, I have seen prayers made in the writ petition on the date of filing, which are in paragraph No.21 of the writ petition. With these prayers this petition was moved before learned Single Bench of this Court on 10.06.2009. Notice was issued returnable four weeks. Ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause ‘E’ was granted. Said interim relief is continued till today. There is one more writ petition pending i.e. W.P.607/2010 but then I am not passing any order right now. Counsel for the petitioner submits that his appeal before learned School Tribunal is pending, interim relief which was in operation when the matter was pending before grievance committee has been continued for the period of six weeks, same relief ought to have been continued by the learned Presiding Officer School Tribunal, however he has rejected the said application. He therefore, seeks quashment of the said order. Per contra, counsel appearing for respondents No.1 to 4 submitted that petition bears no substance, be dismissed. petitioner has misrepresented before the learned Grievance Committee and obtained interim relief which has been continued from time to time. Submission is made to dismiss the petition. I have also heard learned A.G.P. 6. Pendency of the matter before various courts is a matter of concern. This petition is one of the classic example which shows pendency of the proceeding before the Tribunal or the Court. What I have seen from the record is that the petitioner had challenged his termination dated 29.12.2006 by respondent No.1 in that appeal. Said appeal was filed before the President, Grievance Committee for Entertaining complaints of Shikshan Sevak, Mumbai Camp at Aurangabad registered as appeal No.3/2007. Counsel for the petitioner gives date of filing of appeal before grievance committee on 16.01.2007. This 4 appeal itself was directed against the order of termination dated 29.12.2006. When this appeal was taken up before the President of the Grievance Committee, order came to be passed on 01.07.2007. This order has been pointed out by counsel appearing for the petitioner and respondents No.1 to 4. I have considered this order passed by the President. It is observed in this order “The appellant has prayed that her termination order dated 29.12.2006 be quashed and set aside. This indirectly indicates that services of the appellant have been terminated.” President of the Grievance Committee has further observed that “It is also made clear that if the appellant is in service as on today, what is the consequence of this fact, will be taken into consideration finally at the time of final hearing of the appeal and its decision.” 7. The conduct of the present petitioner is noticed. The order passed by the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, in my view cannot be said to be perverse. This petition bears no substance. 8. I am inclined to dismiss the writ petition. Matter is pending for more than two years. Dates are very clear. Interim order was passed by the President Grievance Committee on 01.07.2007, protection was granted for six weeks. Thereafter appeal was disposed off on 28.04.2009 by the President Grievance Committee. Counsel for the petitioner submits that appeal before School Tribunal was filed on 02.05.2009. These dates are self explanatory. 9. In my view, parties can be directed to remain present before learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nashik i.e petitioner and respondents No.1 to 4 shall appear before Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nashik on 08.03.2010. This Court has granted ad-interim relief in terms of prayer clause “E”. I am continuing this relief till 08.03.2010. 5 10. Writ petition stands dismissed and disposed of. Ad-interim relief granted earlier by this Court in terms of prayer clause ‘E’ stands continued till 08.03.2010. Learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nashik is directed to decide and dispose of appeal, pending before him, within a period of four weeks from 08.03.2010 i.e. on or before 06.04.2010. It is made clear that parties are permitted to raise appropriate contentions before Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nashik, shall decide appeal in accordance with the provisions of law. Writ Petition stands disposed of in above terms. Rule stands discharged. ( S. B. DESHMUKH ) JUDGE. ..... aaa/3413.09