WP/5858/1998 : 1 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.5858 OF 1998 Shri Mahadeo Vithoba Mali ... Petitioner V/s. The Chairman Shri Ramchandra Dhondi Kanase & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.L.S. Deshmukh for Petitioner Mr.Prathamesh Bhargude i/b Sugandh Deshmukh for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr.Milind Deshmukh for Res. No.3 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: OCTOBER 1, 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT: 1. The petition has worked itself out inasmuch as the petitioner who had challenged an order of the School Tribunal has retired. It was the contention of the petitioner before the School Tribunal that he ought to be appointed as the Headmaster of the school. It appears that pursuant to a certificate produced by the petitioner indicating that he belonged to the scheduled castes, he was appointed as headmaster. However, the Education Officer did not approve his appointment to the post of headmaster. He, therefore, challenged the order of the Education Officer before the School Tribunal. Simultaneously, Respondent No.3 claimed that he was the seniormost assistant teacher and ought to have been appointed as a headmaster. He too filed an appeal before the School Tribunal being Appeal No.189 of 1996. Both these appeals were heard together and the School Tribunal concluded that the caste certificate obtained by the petitioner was not reliable. The School WP/5858/1998 : 2 : Tribunal therefore dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner being Appeal No.83 of 1995 and allowed the Appeal No.189 of 1996. 2. The petitioner had obtained a stay of the order passed by the School Tribunal. Accordingly, he continued to work as a headmaster in the school during the pendency of this writ petition. He retired on 31.3.2001. The Petitioner ought to have been paid consequential benefits which he was entitled to while working as a headmaster in view of prayer clause (c) of the petition having been granted. It appears however that he was not paid an amount of Rs.29,511/- which was the difference in the salary payable to the headmaster and an assistant teacher. 3. In view of the fact that the petitioner has admittedly worked as a headmaster in the school albeit, due to orders of this Court, the amount of Rs.29,511/- shall be paid to the petitioner within four weeks from today. 4. However, this order is passed without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the petitioner to claim the difference in wages payable to the headmaster and an assistant teacher from 1994 to 10.12.1998. 5. The contention of Respondent No.1, that the petitioner's caste certificate is fabricated, has been accepted by the caste scrutiny committee and it is found that the petitioner does not belong to the scheduled castes as claimed by him. 6. The contention of Respondent No.1 management is that the petitioner had obtained a caste certificate showing that he belonged to the scheduled caste. That WP/5858/1998 : 3 : certificate was sent to the Caste Scrutiny Committee by the Institution. The Caste Scrutiny Committee has held that the petitioner belongs to the Other Backward Classes. The Divisional Caste Scrutiny Committee, Nagpur has also found on scrutiny that the petitioner did not belong to the scheduled caste category. 7. Taking all these facts into consideration, in my view, the petition must be dismissed subject to the order payment of Rs.29,511/-. This order directing the petitioner to be paid will also be subject to any proceedings which the institution may wish to institute against the petitioner for presenting a false certificate. 8. The petition is therefore dismissed. WP/5858/1998 : 4 : vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION NO.156 OF 2006 IN WRIT PETITION NO.5858 OF 1998 Shri Mahadeo Vithoba Mali ... Petitioner V/s. The Chairman Shri Ramchandra Dhondi Kanase & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.L.S. Deshmukh for Petitioner Mr.Prathamesh Bhargude i/b Sugandh Deshmukh for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 Mr.Milind Deshmukh for Res. No.3 CORAM: SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. DATED: OCTOBER 1, 2010 P.C.: The contempt petition has been filed claiming that the order of this Court dated 11.12.2001 has not been complied. In view of the fact that I have already directed Respondent No.1 to pay the amount of Rs.29,511/- to the petitioner for having worked as a headmaster, albeit on false grounds, the contempt petition is dismissed. The prayer for interest is rejected.