Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, the management of Shri Ganesh High School, challenged an order dated 24-4-2006 passed by the Additional School Tribunal, Chandrapur, in Contempt Petition No.12 of 2005. The Tribunal had directed the management to pay back wages to respondent No.1, Smt. Savitri Patel, from 7-5-1988 until her retirement on superannuation, and further directed the Education Officer to deduct the amount from non-salary grants payable to the school. The background: Respondent No.1 was terminated from service and appealed to the School Tribunal, which by judgment dated 29-11-1988 allowed her appeal and ordered reinstatement from 7-5-1988 with back wages in the pay scale of Rs.365-760. The management challenged this in Writ Petition No.2873 of 1988, and on 13-4-1989, the High Court passed an interim order directing payment only for periods mentioned in a letter dated 5-12-1988, subject to final adjustment. Despite this, the management did not comply fully, leading to contempt proceedings. The Tribunal held that the interim order did not nullify the final order of reinstatement and that the management was liable to pay wages for the entire period. The High Court, in the present petition, upheld the Tribunal's order, finding no error in the direction for back wages from the date of reinstatement. The court noted that the interim order was only an interim arrangement and did not override the final order. The petition was dismissed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Back Wages - Reinstatement - Section 11(3) Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - The School Tribunal, in contempt proceedings, directed payment of back wages from 7-5-1988 till superannuation, despite an interim High Court order limiting payment to certain periods - Held that the interim order did not override the final order of reinstatement, and the Tribunal's direction was valid as it enforced the original order - (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the School Tribunal could direct payment of back wages from the date of reinstatement (7-5-1988) till superannuation, despite an interim order of the High Court directing payment only for certain periods, and whether such direction was within the Tribunal's contempt jurisdiction under Section 11(3) of the MEPS Act.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the order of the Additional School Tribunal dated 24-4-2006 directing payment of back wages from 7-5-1988 till superannuation.
Law Points
- Back wages
- Reinstatement
- Section 11(3) MEPS Act
- Contempt jurisdiction
- School Tribunal
- Interim order
- Final order
- Payment of salary
Case Details
2012 LawText (BOM) (06) 103
Writ Petition No.3470 of 2006
Shri A.P. Girhe, Advocate holding for Shri S.S. Ghate, Advocate for Petitioners; Shri P.V. Navlani, Advocate holding for Shri Anand Parchure, Advocate for Respondent No.1; Smt. T.D. Khade, AGP for Respondent No.2
President, Shri Ganesh Shikshan Sanstha, Bhandara; Secretary, School Committee, Shri Ganesh High School, Bhandara; Shri Ganesh High School, Bhandara through its Head Master
Smt. Savitri w/o Pushpashil Patel; Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Bhandara
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging an order passed in contempt proceedings by the Additional School Tribunal directing payment of back wages.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners (school management) sought to quash the order dated 24-4-2006 passed in Contempt Petition No.12 of 2005.
Filing Reason
The School Tribunal held the management in contempt for not complying with the reinstatement order and directed payment of back wages from 7-5-1988 till superannuation.
Previous Decisions
The School Tribunal by judgment dated 29-11-1988 allowed the appeal of respondent No.1 and ordered reinstatement from 7-5-1988. The management filed Writ Petition No.2873 of 1988, and on 13-4-1989, the High Court passed an interim order directing payment for certain periods. The management did not comply fully, leading to contempt proceedings.
Issues
Whether the School Tribunal could direct payment of back wages from the date of reinstatement despite an interim order of the High Court limiting payment to certain periods.
Whether the direction for back wages was within the Tribunal's contempt jurisdiction under Section 11(3) of the MEPS Act.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioners argued that the interim order of the High Court dated 13-4-1989 limited the payment to periods mentioned in the letter dated 5-12-1988, and therefore the Tribunal could not direct payment for the entire period.
Respondent No.1 argued that the interim order was only an interim arrangement and did not override the final order of reinstatement, and the management was liable to pay wages for the entire period.
Ratio Decidendi
An interim order passed by the High Court does not override the final order of reinstatement passed by the School Tribunal. The management is liable to pay back wages from the date of reinstatement as per the final order, and the Tribunal has jurisdiction under Section 11(3) of the MEPS Act to enforce compliance through contempt proceedings.
Judgment Excerpts
This petition challenges the order dated 24-4-2006 passed in Contempt Petition No.12 of 2005 by the presiding Officer, Additional School Tribunal, (Nagpur) Chandrapur, in exercise of its power under Section 11(3) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of service) Regulation Act, 1977, holding that the respondent No.1 is entitled to back wages since 7-5-1988 till her retirement on superannuation.
The interim order dated 13-4-1989 was only an interim arrangement and did not override the final order of reinstatement.
Procedural History
Respondent No.1 was terminated from service. She filed Appeal STN No.88 of 1988 before the School Tribunal, which allowed the appeal on 29-11-1988 ordering reinstatement from 7-5-1988. The management filed Writ Petition No.2873 of 1988, and on 13-4-1989, the High Court passed an interim order directing payment for certain periods. The management did not comply fully, leading to Contempt Petition No.12 of 2005. The Additional School Tribunal passed the impugned order on 24-4-2006. The management then filed the present writ petition.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977: Section 11(3)
