1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.1183 OF 2009. Talat Shikshan Mandal, through its President Mahemood-ur-Rahman Siddiqui s/o Amiruddin Siddiqui. ... PETITIONER. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra and others. ... RESPONDENTS. ... Shri A.M. Karad, Advocate for Petitioner. Shri K.G. Patil, A.G.P. for R.Nos.1 to 4. Shri Ajay Deshpande, Advocate for R.Nos.5 and 6. Shri S.W. Munde, Advocate holding for Shri Joydeep Chatterji, Advocate for R.Nos.7 to 19. ... CORAM : A.M. KHANWILKAR AND S.S. SHINDE, JJ. DATE : 1st FEBRUARY, 2010. PER COURT: 1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners are challenging the order passed by the Director of Education, Pune dated 24th June, 2008, to the extent 2 of clause 2 thereof. In clause 2, the petitioners have been directed to make good the sum of Rs. 10,25,022/- (Rs.Ten lakhs twenty five thousand twenty two only), which, as prima facie found by the Director of Education, Pune, is the 10% amount deducted from the salaries of the employees of the school. The fact that the said amount was deducted is not in dispute. The stand of the petitioners is that the deduction was effected as per the permission given by the Education Officer on the basis of the consent given by the employees in that behalf. The fact remains that the employees, at least some of them, have questioned the genuineness of the resolution pressed into service by the petitioners. The petitioners on the other hand assert that the employees have consented for such deduction of 10% amount from their salaries. Considering the grievance of the employees, the Director of Education, Pune, prima facie, found that the deduction so made by the petitioners was inappropriate and impermissible for which the petitioners were obliged to return the said amount forthwith. For the nature of operative order that we propose to pass, it may not be necessary to 3 analyze the decision of the Director of Education, Pune in greater details. Suffice it to observe that the opinion recorded by the Director of Education, Pune is only a prima facie opinion. The Education Officer (Secondary) intends to initiate action to de-recognize the school in question. In the said inquiry, all aspects and charges against the management will have to be inquired into, in accordance with law. During the said inquiry, one of the charges against the management would be of inappropriate deduction of 10% of salaries of the concerned employees. It will be open to the group of employees, who are opposed to the stand taken by the management and instead, contend that the resolutions have been fabricated by the management, to appear in the said inquiry before the Education Officer in support of their stand. The Education Officer, in other words, will have to record finding of fact on the correctness of the charge or the allegation of the employees concerned. Dependent on that final decision of the Education Officer, the Management would, in any case, be obliged to abide by appropriate directions that would be issued by the Education Officer including 4 the directions to refund the amount of Rs. 10,25,022/- while deciding question of de- recognition of the school. All aspects in that behalf can be and will have to be addressed in the said proceedings. The Counsel appearing for the respondents including the Education Officer submit that in such situation, it may not be necessary to record any further reasons while disposing of this writ petition. 3. In so far as the challenge to the show cause notice dated 2nd February, 2009 is concerned, we find substance in the grievance made by the petitioners that the same is founded on the opinion recorded in the preliminary inquiry already conducted, which however, was not in the context of the issue of de-recognition of the school. The learned A.G.P., in all fairness, submits that the Education Officer will follow the procedure specified in the Secondary School Code in relation to the proposed action of de-recognition of the school and issue fresh notice clearly specifying the charges which the management is expected to deal with so as to give opportunity to the 5 management to submit its response as well as effective defence. 4. As no other relief is pressed in the present petition, we propose to dispose of this writ petition with the following directions: (a) The Education Officer shall issue fresh show cause notice, which will be consistent with the requirements of the provisions of the Secondary School Code, for initiation of action of de-recognition of the school. It should clearly specify the allegations or charges on the basis of which the proposed action is contemplated and not merely proceed on the basis of the finding of guilt already recorded against the management in the preliminary inquiry already concluded. In other words, the proposed action of de- recognition of the school will have to proceed on its own merits, in accordance with law, uninfluenced by the prima facie findings recorded in the preliminary 6 inquiry; (b) The management through the Secretary and the President through Counsel undertake before this Court that in the event the Education Officer were to accept the claim of the group of employees who alleged that the resolution has been fabricated, the management will forthwith deposit the amount of Rs.10,25,022/- (Rs. Ten lakhs twenty five thousand twenty two only) with the Education Officer, to be disbursed to the concerned employees from whose salary it has been proportionately deducted. The President as well as the Secretary of the management shall file affidavit of undertaking in this Court within one week from today, which is the condition precedent for showing this indulgence; (c) We make it clear that it will be open to the Education Officer to refer to the same facts and evidence / allegations, in 7 respect of which preliminary inquiry was conducted, as the basis to initiate proposed action of de-recognition of the school but, those charges will have to be decided by the Education Officer on its own merits, after considering the reply and the evidence submitted by the management as well as the supporting group of employees in the proposed enquiry; (d) The Education Officer shall issue fresh notice to the management as per clause (a) above within two weeks from today and proceed with the inquiry, in accordance with the law, expeditiously. The petitioners undertake to extend full co-operation for early disposal of the said inquiry. The inquiry shall be concluded, in any case, within twelve weeks from the date of issuance of show cause notice; (e) The affidavit of undertaking shall also be in the form of personal indemnity 8 of the President and the Secretary to make good the entire amount of Rs.10,25,022/- jointly and severally. The undertaking shall also record that the amount will be deposited within two weeks from the date of communication received in that behalf from the Education Officer, irrespective of the remedy of appeal available to the petitioners. Petition disposed of on the above terms. [S.S. SHINDE, J] [A.M. KHANWILKAR, J] PLK/*