1 wp4962.10.sxw IN THE HIGH COURT OF JDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4962 OF 2010 The President/Secretary Ghatkopar Shikshan Prasarak Mandals & Ors. ..Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Mr. V.S. Jagdale for the Petitioners. Mr. C.R. Sonawane,AGP for the Respondents. CORAM : P.B. MAJMUDAR AND A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATE : 10TH FEBRUARY, 2011. P.C. 1. It is not in dispute that the Tribunal has already passed an order of reinstatement of the concerned teacher with other benefits. The Writ Petition No. 9181 of 2005 filed by the petitioners has already been dismissed by the learned Single Judge against which no further proceedings have been initiated by the petitioners. The petitioner School is an aided institution. The State Government has issued letter to the Management to comply with the order passed by the School Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that since the teacher has filed execution proceedings, the Government 2 wp4962.10.sxw should not have issued such letter. 2. In our view, grievance of the petitioners is not justified especially when the school is an aided school. The order of the School Tribunal is confirmed by the Single Judge of this High Court. In view of the same ,we do not find any justification in the say of the petitioners that the State Government should not have issued letter to the Management in respect of the order of the Tribunal. The management has not reinstated the teacher. The learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the difference in emolument including salary allowances and increment, if any, are not required to be paid. The Tribunal has already passed an order to pay difference in emoluments including the salary allowances and increment, if any. The petitioners have to pay the difference in emolument including salary allowances and increment, if any, as ordered by the Tribunal. If the petitioners have any grievance about this order the petitioner may get clarification from the Tribunal. If the petitioners have any grievance about the quantum of difference in emolument including salary allowances and increment if any, the petitioners may make take this point in execution proceedings which are pending before the Tribunal as according to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, execution proceedings are pending before the Tribunal. There is nothing wrong on the part of the Government in asking the petitioner to implement the order of the Tribunal. Suffice to say that no interference of this Court is called for in its extraordinary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of Constitution of India and hence, the petition is dismissed. ( A.A. SAYED, J. ) (P.B. MAJMUDAR, J.)