1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5213 OF 2009 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 6285 OF 2009 ____________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office } Memoranda of Coram, } Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's } orders or directions } and Registrar's orders } ___________________________}___________________________________ Mrs.A.N.Ansari, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. N.B.Patil, A.G.P. for State. Mr. Vivek Dhage, Advocate for respondent 2 & 3. ........................... [ CORAM : K.K.TATED, J. ] DATE : 14/10/2009. PER COURT : 1. Heard respective counsel for parties. 2. Writ Petition No. 5213 of 2009 filed by teacher challenging the Order dated 4/7/2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad in Appeal No. 6 of 2007, by which enquiry and consequential termination order dated 20/1/2007 is set aside and liberty granted to the 2 management to initiate fresh enquiry on the basis of charge sheet dated 9/8/2006, whereas the management preferred Writ Petition NO. 6285 of 2009 challenging the part of Judgment and Order dated 4/7/2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad in Appeal No. 6 of 2007 to the extent to treat the teacher as under suspension from 20/1/2007 and payment of subsistence allowance till the decision of enquiry. Both the counsels make statement that if the impugned order dated 4/7/2009 passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad is set aside and directed the Tribunal to decide the Appeal on its merits, then they have no objection. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of teacher in Writ Petition NO. 4213 of 2009 relied on Judgment in the matter of Bhagwanrao S/o Vishwanath Vyawhare and another V/s Sau. Sunita W/o Gopinath Palve and another reported in 2008 (1) Mh.L.J. 417. In this case also, remand order was set aside by the court for fresh enquiry. Head Note ‘ A ’ of this Judgment reads as under : “ Maharashtra Employees 3 of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981, RR. 36,37 and 38 - Enquiry proceedings against respondent no. 1 found to be defective – Breach of rules 36,37, 38 in the matter of constitution of the Inquiry Committee and also the manner in which the proceedings were conducted – As a consequence the School Tribunal directed her reinstatement setting aside her termination – Contention of respondent no. 1 that petitioners were bent upon to remove her by hook or crook, is well founded – Permission to conduct fresh enquiry against respondent no. 1 can not be granted ”. 3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case and the consent given by both the counsels, the impugned order passed by the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad dated 4/7/2009 in Appeal No. 6 of 2007 is set aside and matter is remanded back to the School Tribunal, 4 Aurangabad for hearing on its own merits. It is made clear that all points are kept open for both the parties. The Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad is directed to decide Appeal No. 6 of 2007 as early as possible, in any case, within six months from the receipt of writ from this Court. 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of petitioner in Writ Petition No. 5213 of 2009 states that at present there is no Presiding Officer at Aurangabad School Tribunal. If that is correct, then matter to be kept before the Presiding Officer in-charge of the Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad. Both the petitions disposed of accordingly. [ K.K.TATED ] JUDGE knp/WP5213.............09