Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Karuna Govindra Umbarkar, filed a writ petition in 1994 seeking a mandamus against the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Wardha (respondent No.1) for payment of salary for the period she worked with Yashwant Gramin Shikshan Sanstha (respondent No.2). Alternatively, she sought a direction against respondent No.2 to pay arrears of salary. During the pendency of the petition, the request of respondent No.2 for approval to the post held by the petitioner was rejected by respondent No.1. The respondent No.2 alleged that the refusal to grant approval was erroneous. However, neither the petitioner nor respondent No.2 challenged the act of respondent No.1 in refusing approval. The court observed that the petitioner had an alternative remedy before the School Tribunal under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, and that the petition was filed in 1994 and was pending for a long time. The court dismissed the petition on the ground of laches and availability of alternative remedy, without expressing any opinion on the merits.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment - Approval - Mandamus - The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus against the Education Officer for payment of salary for the period she worked with the school. The court held that since the petitioner did not challenge the refusal of approval by the Education Officer, the claim for salary from the government was not maintainable. (Paras 1-4)
B) Service Law - Alternative Remedy - Laches - The court noted that the petition was filed in 1994 and the petitioner had an alternative remedy before the School Tribunal under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977. The court dismissed the petition on the ground of laches and availability of alternative remedy. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus for payment of salary from the Education Officer (Primary) when the appointment was not approved, and whether the petitioner can claim salary from the school in the alternative.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Mandamus
- Approval of appointment
- Salary from government
- Alternative remedy
- Laches
Case Details
2010 LawText (BOM) (01) 312
Writ Petition No. 702 of 1994
A.H. Joshi, Prasanna B. Varale
Shri P.C. Madkholkar and Shri Gupta for petitioner; None for respondent No.1; Shri P.D. Meghe for respondent No.2 (absent)
1. The Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Wardha; 2. Yashwant Gramin Shikshan Sanstha, through its Secretary, Wardha
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition seeking mandamus for payment of salary and alternative direction for arrears of salary.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought a writ of mandamus against respondent No.1 for payment of salary for the period she worked with respondent No.2, and in the alternative, a direction against respondent No.2 to pay arrears of salary.
Filing Reason
Petitioner claimed salary for the period she worked with respondent No.2, but the Education Officer refused to grant approval to the post, and the school did not pay salary.
Previous Decisions
During pendency of petition, respondent No.2's request for approval to the post held by petitioner was rejected by respondent No.1.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ of mandamus for payment of salary from the Education Officer when the appointment was not approved.
Whether the petitioner can claim salary from the school in the alternative.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner claimed salary for work done with respondent No.2.
Respondent No.2 alleged that the refusal to grant approval by respondent No.1 was erroneous.
Ratio Decidendi
A writ of mandamus for payment of salary from the government is not maintainable when the petitioner has not challenged the refusal of approval to the post. Further, the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the School Tribunal under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, and the petition is also barred by laches.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioner is primarily claiming the relief by way of a mandamus against the respondent No.1 for payment of salary for the period for which the petitioner has worked with the respondent No.2.
During the pendency of the petition, the request of the respondent No.2 for approval to the post held by the petitioner was rejected as is evident from the affidavit of respondent No.1 and of the respondent No.2.
Pertinently enough, either amongst the petitioner or the respondent No.2, have not challenged the act of respondent No.1 in refusing the approval.
The petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 702 of 1994 in 1994 before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench. During the pendency of the petition, the Education Officer rejected the approval request. The court heard the matter and dismissed the petition on 4th January 2010.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977:
