1 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2462 OF 2007 Shri Dattatraya Eknath Mane ... Petitioner v/s The Secretary, Jijamata Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, At & Post – Tembhurni, Tal. Madha, Dist. Solapur & ors. ... Respondents Mr.I.M.Khairdi for the petitioner. Mr.R.S.Alange for respondent No.1. Mr.D.V.Godbole for respondent No.2. Mr.P.I.Khemani, A.G.P. For Resp. Nos.3 to 5. CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: 1ST JULY, 2010 P.C.: 1. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent. 2. The writ petition is filed challenging the order passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Solapur, on 14.3.2007. By this order, the School Tribunal has refused to condone the delay caused in filing the appeal. 2 3. Admittedly, the petitioner has challenged his supersession by preferring the appeal before the School Tribunal on 11.7.2006. Although an application for condoning the delay in filing such an appeal was not necessary, the petitioner filed the same. The Tribunal decided that miscellaneous application and held that the petitioner had not furnished sufficient reasons for condoning the delay. 4. It is now well settled in view of the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court (Aurangabad Bench) in the case of Mohammad Hasan Khan v/s Mohammad Majidulla & ors., reported in 2002 (4) ALL MR 512, that an appeal against an order of supersession is filed under section 9(1)(b) of the M.E.P.S. Act. The provisions of limitation set out in sub-section (2) of Section 9 do not apply to appeals filed under Section 9(1)(b) and, therefore, the School Tribunal has erred in dismissing the miscellaneous application which has resulted in dismissal of the appeal. 5. Accordingly, the order passed in the miscellaneous application is set aside. 7. Mr.Khairdi submits that he may be permitted to 3 withdraw the miscellaneous application. That permission is granted. 8. The School Tribunal is directed to register the appeal and to hear the same in accordance with law. ..... 4