IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL RIVISION APPLICATION NO. 347 OF 2002 MANUBHAI THAKKAR ..APPLICANT V/S SMT. ANNIE F. VALIYAVEETIL & ORS...RESPONDENTS MR. A.G. KOTHARI, ADVOCATE, FOR THE APPLICANT. MR. R.S. APTE, ADVOCATE WITH MR. A.A. GARGE,FOR RESPONDENT NO.1. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. CORAM: J.H. BHATIA, J. DATE : 17TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 17TH MARCH, 2008. DATE : 17TH MARCH, 2008. P.C. 1. Learned counsel for both the parties concede that the grievance of the Respondent is not covered under section 9 of the M.E.P.S. Act. However, she can certainly make a representation to the Employer or to the Education Officer under Rule 24 of the MEPS Rules as held by the learned Single Judge of this court in Satyawadi v/s Aruna Ganpatrao reported in 2000(2) Maharashtra Law Journal 322. In para 10 of that judgment it was observed that the employee may have a remedy to file a civil suit, if he is unsuccessful, under Rule 24 of the M.E.P.S. Rules. In view of this the learned counsel for the parties agree that this : 2: Revision Application may be disposed of with following directions:- 2. The Respondent/Original Plaintiff shall make a representation to the Education Officer/Deputy Director of Education within 4 weeks from this day and within 8 weeks after such representation is submitted the Education Officer/Deputy Director shall hear the parties and pass appropriate orders on that representation. 3. Pending the representation before such Education Officer/Dy. Director the Civil Suit No. 557 of 2001 on the file of Civil Judge, Junior Division, Kalyan, shall remain stayed. After decision of the Education Officer/Deputy Director on the representation, the suit may proceed subject to result of that decision. Revision Application stands disposed of accordingly. (J. H. BHATIA, J) (J. H. BHATIA, J) (J. H. BHATIA, J)