WP/7917/2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7917 OF 2010 Atpadi Education Society, Atpadi, Sangli ... Petitioner V/s. Janardan Maruti Mane & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. Dilip Bodke for the Petitioner. Mr. V.S. Deokar for Respondent No.1. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP, for Respondent Nos.2 and 3. CORAM : SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATE : 20 TH JANUARY, 2011. P.C. : 1. This Writ Petition has been preferred against the order of the School Tribunal, Kolhapur dated 1st April, 2010 passed in Appeal No.74 of 2003. By this order the School Tribunal has directed that respondent No.1 should be treated as notionally appointed as a “Head Master” from 16th June, 2003 to 31st March, 2006. The order promoting respondent No.4 herein has been set aside. 2. The main contention of Mr. Bodake, the learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, is that while appointing a Head Master, the Management is expected to consider not only the qualifications of the Assistant Teacher but also the record of service of that teacher. He points out that under Rule 3(3) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Condition of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and Rules, 1981, the teacher who the Management proposes to appoint as a “Head WP/7917/2010 2 Master” must have a satisfactory record of service. According to him, the School Tribunal has not discussed this issue at all and, therefore, the impugned order is liable to be set aside. 3. The learned Advocate for the respondent No.1 submits that the explanation to the aforesaid Rule indicates that if there are any adverse remarks in the confidential reports of the teacher, who is being considered for appointment as a “Head Master” during the previous five years, the adverse remarks must be communicated in writing to that teacher or else those remarks are to be disregarded. 4. Unfortunately, the School Tribunal has not considered this issue at all and in these circumstances, in my view, it would be appropriate to remand the matter to the School Tribunal to decide whether it could be said that respondent No.1 was not suitable for being appointed as a “Head Master”, as contended by the petitioner. 5. Accordingly, the Appeal No.74 of 2003 is remanded back to the School Tribunal, Kolhapur for a decision on this issue only. 6. The School Tribunal, Kolhapur shall dispose of the Appeal No.74 of 2003 within a period of three months from today. 7. The Writ Petition is disposed of with the aforesaid directions.