1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPP) NO.131/2009 IN MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPP) NO.132/2009 IN CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.802/2009 (D) Applicant :- Smt. Leelabai w/o Darshan Modak, Ori. Complainant aged about 69 years, Occu. Rtd., Teacher, R/o Hardas Nagar, Lashkaribagh Circle No.15/21, Near M.S.E.B. Office, Nagpur Police Station, Panchpaouli, Nagpur. Now R/o Sai-Shradha Apartment No.102, Plot No.143, 144, Manish Nagar, Somalwada, Nagpur (P.S. Sonegaon). ...Versus... Respondents :- 1. Shri Mahesh K. Karajgaonkar, The then Education Officer (Secondary), Now Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nagpur (P.S. Sadar). 2. Shri Rajendra Godhane, The then Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Nagpur, now Education Officer, (Primary) Zilla Parishad, Bhandara, (P.S. Bhandara). 3. Smt. Sushma Londhe, Head Master, Adarsha Kanya Shala, Bezanbagh, No.10 Bridge, Kamptee Road, Nagpur – 440004. Police Station, Jaripatka, Nagpur. 4. Shri H.C. Nerkar, Section Officer, Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nagpur. 2 5. Shri J.M. Pathak, Then Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400032. Now Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Mumbai – 400032. 6. Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400032. 7. Smt. Madhuratai Kikane, Deputy Secretary, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400032. 8. Smt. Jayashree Sonawane, Section Officer, Mashi – 6, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400032. 9. Shri S.K. Salunke The then Deputy Director, Now Secretary, Higher and Secondary Education Boar, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, P.S.O. Sitaburdi. 10. The State of Maharashtra. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [Shri A.B. Moon, Adv. for applicant] [Shri S.S. Joshi, Adv. for respdt. Nos.1 to 4] [Shri A.S. Sonare, APP for respdt. No.10] CORAM:- A.B. CHAUDHARI, J. DATED :- 02.02.2010 1. This is an application for condonation of delay in filing application for restoration of Criminal Application No.802/2009. 2. Heard. 3. For the reasons stated in the application, delay is condoned. Criminal Application is allowed. 3 Criminal Application stands disposed of. MISC. CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APPP) No.132/2001 1. Heard. 2. For the reasons stated in the application, the same is allowed in terms of its prayer clause – (I). Misc. Criminal Application stands disposed of. CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO..802/2009 1. Not on board. Taken on board. Taken up for final hearing in order matters. 2. Heard. 3. Learned Counsel for the applicant sought time to produce documents. Since the documents which learned Counsel for the applicant wants to produce are of no relevance with the present matter and for the said purpose time was given to him on 18.1.2010 and 1.2.2010, it is not possible to adjourn the proceedings. 4. It appears that the applicant was working as a teacher in a school run by Nagsen Education Society and that she served for about 24 years. It further appears that for certain charges of misconduct, regular departmental enquiry was conducted against her and the enquiry committee after enquiry recommended termination of her services and accordingly her services stood terminated w.e.f. 21.2.1984. It further appears that the appeal was filed before the School Tribunal Vide Appeal No.385/1984 and eventually the said appeal was dismissed for want of prosecution. 4 5. Learned Counsel for the applicant states that there was a compromise in the said appeal but then there is nothing to show on record about such alleged compromise or acceptance thereof by the Tribunal. On the contrary, the facts reveal that the said order of the Tribunal i.e. dismissal for want of prosecution became final. The applicant then assumed that even for a terminated employee, pension is admissible and with this impression, she went on making correspondence with the Officers of the Government of Maharashtra. During the course of this correspondence it appears that some Officers of the Government and the School Headmistress described the said termination as 'dismissal' from service and therefore, the applicant went under impression that because dismissal of service was recorded, she was being deliberately deprived of pension and this the Headmistress and Officers of the Government were doing because she belongs to Scheduled Caste and it is on this presumption and assumption she carried an impression in her mind that right from Secretary of the Government of Maharashtra up to the Education Officer everybody was practicing atrocities on her and hence, she filed private complaint before the Criminal Court complaining about the said atrocities. Obviously, there is no direct evidence against Principal Secretary, Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra and other Officers at Mantralaya who have been made party in the said criminal complaint. It is noteworthy that even the impression carried by the applicant that terminated employee is also entitled to pension is wrong as per Pension Rules, but then she carried that impression and continued to force her cause by correspondence and finally filed this criminal complaint against all the Government Officers and the Headmistress. As a matter of fact no pension is allowed to an employee who is terminated 5 after enquiry. The Magistrate dismissed her complaint having found no substance in it. But then feeling aggrieved, she approached the revisional Court, which restricted issuance of process only to the Headmistress/accused No.3 – Sushma Londhe in the complaint and dismissed the revision against all others. These orders are under challenge in the present application. 6. In my opinion, these proceedings are nothing but a clear-cut abuse of process of law in the above factual background. It is difficult to imagine that the applicant who was working as a teacher would not understand what she has been doing. It is further difficult to understand as to how her impression that she was entitled to pension despite termination after enquiry was not removed by her legal Counsel when she took their advice. Looking to the above factual background in the absence of any specific allegation by the applicant against any of the Officers under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 no case was actually made out even for filing the complaint before the Magistrate. There is one more noteworthy and important aspect and to the luck of the applicant. The luck of the applicant is that her case was recommended by these Officers of Education Department to the Government for allowing her compassionate pension despite termination which in the discretion of Government can be allowed under Rule 101 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982. The Government was kind and sympathetic to allow her compassionate pension which perhaps the Government might not have done in other deserving cases. Be that as it may, the applicant should have been thankful to the Government and the Officers. But she wants to prosecute them. This is, therefore, a clear-cut misuse of the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) 6 Act, 1989 by the applicant. Of late the provisions of this Act are being thus put to misuse. Hence, this is a fit case for dismissing this application with costs. In the result, I make the following order. O R D ER (i) Criminal Application is dismissed holding that the same is abuse of process of law and the provisions of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with costs of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) payable to the State of Maharashtra within a period of four weeks from today. (ii) If the amount of cost is not paid within four weeks, the concerned Education Officer shall deduct the same from her pension with suitable installments spread over in six months. JUDGE SSW