1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 113/2009 (Utkarsha Shikshan Prasarak Society through its President, Ramdas P. Supare VERSUS Savitri M. Gaidhane & others) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri Abhay Sambre, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Dhumale h/f Shri A. Parchure, counsel for the R-1 to 8. Shri O.D. Kakde, Assistant Government Pleader for the R-10 & 11. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J. DATE : APRIL 8, 2009. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. The order passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nagpur on 23.07.2008 is extremely just and proper and calls for no inteference as it is prima-facie clear from the facts of the case that the management had illegally terminated the services of the respondents and appointed new Assistant Teachers in their place, for the reasons best known to the petitioners/management. The Tribunal rightly found that this was the fit case for grant of stay as the respondents had made out a clear prima-facie case and the balance of 2 convenience was also in favour of the respondents. The submission made on behalf of the petitioner that a joint appeal by all the respondents was not tenable before the School Tribunal in view of the provisions of Rule 39 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 is not being considered by this Court at this stage as the petitioner had already filed an application before the School Tribunal seeking a dismissal of the appeal in view of the aforesaid position. It would be open for the parties to contest the application before the School Tribunal, Nagpur. Shri Dhumale, the learned counsel for the respondent nos.1 to 8, states that the said respondents would file separate appeal if the need so arises. In the result, the petition fails and is dismissed with no order as to costs. JUDGE APTE