Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ravindra Mahadeorao Gadhave, was an employee of Samrat Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha and Shri Sant Gadge Baba Vidyalaya. He was terminated from service by an order dated 07.04.2001, which was upheld by the School Tribunal, Amravati, in Appeal No. 71 of 2001 vide judgment dated 14.09.2004. The petitioner filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the Tribunal's judgment. The petitioner's counsel argued that the charge sheet dated 16.01.2001 was never served upon him and that the departmental enquiry was conducted in violation of Rules 36 and 37 of the Maharashtra Employees Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. It was contended that the School Tribunal erroneously connected the petitioner's reply dated 30.12.2000 to the charge sheet and ignored the petitioner's stand that he never received the charge sheet. The High Court, after hearing the parties, found that the School Tribunal had not properly considered the issue of service of charge sheet and the compliance with the said Rules. The Court observed that the Tribunal had wrongly connected the reply dated 30.12.2000 to the charge sheet dated 16.01.2001 and had ignored the petitioner's contention of non-receipt. Consequently, the High Court set aside the judgment of the School Tribunal and remanded the matter back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, directing the Tribunal to decide the appeal afresh after giving an opportunity to both sides to lead evidence on the issue of service of charge sheet and compliance with Rules 36 and 37. The writ petition was allowed to that extent.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Termination of Service - Departmental Enquiry - Service of Charge Sheet - The petitioner-employee challenged his termination order, contending that the charge sheet dated 16.01.2001 was never served upon him and that the enquiry violated Rules 36 and 37 of the Maharashtra Employees Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. The School Tribunal had upheld the termination, but the High Court found that the Tribunal had erroneously connected the petitioner's reply dated 30.12.2000 to the charge sheet and ignored the petitioner's stand of non-receipt. Held that the matter required remand to the School Tribunal for fresh consideration on the issue of service of charge sheet and compliance with the said Rules. (Paras 3-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the School Tribunal erred in upholding the termination order without properly considering the petitioner's contention that the charge sheet dated 16.01.2001 was not served upon him and that the enquiry was conducted in violation of Rules 36 and 37 of the Maharashtra Employees Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981.
Final Decision
The High Court set aside the judgment of the School Tribunal dated 14.09.2004 and remanded the matter back to the School Tribunal for fresh consideration. The Tribunal was directed to decide the appeal afresh after giving an opportunity to both sides to lead evidence on the issue of service of charge sheet and compliance with Rules 36 and 37 of the Maharashtra Employees Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. The writ petition was allowed to that extent.
Law Points
- Natural justice
- Service of charge sheet
- Departmental enquiry
- Remand
- Rules 36 and 37 of Maharashtra Employees Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules
- 1981
