Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Sanjay Arjun Dhule, an employee of an Ashram School, filed a writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order dated 29 January 2011 passed by the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati (respondent No.2). The impugned order refused to entertain the petitioner's appeal on the ground that the Additional Commissioner had not been empowered by the State Government to hear such appeals. During the hearing, the Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3 submitted that, as per the Full Bench judgment of the Bombay High Court in Suryakant Sheshrao Panchal vs. Vasantrao Naik Vimukta Jati Bhatakya Jamati Aadarsh Prasarak Mandal and others, reported in 2002 (3) Mh.L.J. 659, Ashram Schools are not private schools falling within the ambit of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act. Consequently, the remedy of appeal under Section 9 of that Act is not available to an employee of such a school. The Assistant Government Pleader further submitted that the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, is the appropriate authority to deal with appeals from employees of Ashram Schools. The court accepted this submission and held that the impugned order dated 29/01/2011 would not survive. The court directed the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati (respondent No.2) to hear and decide the petitioner's appeal as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date of the order. The petition was disposed of accordingly.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Ashram Schools - Jurisdiction of Appellate Authority - Ashram Schools are not private schools under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act - The Full Bench judgment in Suryakant Sheshrao Panchal vs. Vasantrao Naik Vimukta Jati Bhatakya Jamati Aadarsh Prasarak Mandal and others, 2002 (3) Mh.L.J. 659, held that Ashram Schools are not private schools under the said Act, and therefore the remedy of appeal under Section 9 is not available to an employee of such a school - The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, is the appropriate authority to deal with appeals from employees of Ashram Schools (Paras 3-4).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, has the authority to entertain an appeal filed by an employee of an Ashram School, and whether Ashram Schools fall within the ambit of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 29/01/2011 was set aside. The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati (respondent No.2) was directed to hear and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from the date of the order. The petition was disposed of.
Law Points
- Ashram Schools are not private schools under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act
- remedy of appeal under Section 9 not available
- Additional Commissioner is appropriate appellate authority for tribal development matters
Case Details
2011 LawText (BOM) (06) 114
Writ Petition No.1300/2011
Shri S. U. Bhuyar for petitioner; Shri A.D.Sonak, Asstt. Govt. Pleader for respondent Nos.1 to 3; Shri S. W. Deshpande for respondent Nos.4 & 5
State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Department of Tribal Development; Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati; The Project Officer, Integrated Project Development, Project Dharni; Dayaram Patil Smarak Trust, Dharni; Ghyan Mandir Ashram Shala, Chakarda
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging an order refusing to entertain an appeal.
Remedy Sought
The petitioner sought to set aside the order dated 29/01/2011 and to direct the Additional Commissioner to hear the appeal.
Filing Reason
The Additional Commissioner refused to entertain the petitioner's appeal on the ground that he was not empowered by the State Government to hear such appeals.
Previous Decisions
The impugned order dated 29/01/2011 was passed by the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati.
Issues
Whether the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, has the authority to entertain an appeal filed by an employee of an Ashram School.
Whether Ashram Schools fall within the ambit of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act.
Submissions/Arguments
The Assistant Government Pleader submitted that as per the Full Bench judgment in Suryakant Sheshrao Panchal vs. Vasantrao Naik Vimukta Jati Bhatakya Jamati Aadarsh Prasarak Mandal and others, Ashram Schools are not private schools under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act, and therefore the remedy of appeal under Section 9 is not available. He further submitted that the Additional Commissioner is the appropriate authority to deal with appeals.
Ratio Decidendi
Ashram Schools are not private schools under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, and therefore the remedy of appeal under Section 9 of that Act is not available to an employee of such a school. The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, is the appropriate authority to hear appeals from employees of Ashram Schools.
Judgment Excerpts
Ashram Schools are not the Private Schools falling within the ambit of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act and therefore, the remedy of Appeal under Section 9 would not be available to an employee of such a school.
The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati respondent No.2 is directed to hear and decide the appeal filed by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, but not later than eight weeks from date.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed an appeal before the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati, which was refused by order dated 29/01/2011 on the ground of lack of empowerment. The petitioner then filed the present writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act: Section 9
- Constitution of India: Articles 226, 227
