Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, D.A. Kharat, was aggrieved by the appointment of the third respondent, Madhukar Pandurang Kumbhar, as Head Master of a school run by the second respondent, Shriram Education Society. The petitioner initially agitated his claim before the School Tribunal, which rejected it. He then filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging the appointment. During the pendency of the writ petition, the third respondent retired and the petitioner himself came to be appointed as Head Master. Consequently, the only surviving dispute was whether the petitioner was entitled to wages for the interim period between the third respondent's appointment and his own assumption of the post. The petitioner's counsel, Mr. Vashi, submitted that this limited monetary claim could be decided by the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara, as the primary grievance had become infructuous. The court accepted this submission, noting that the writ petition no longer served any purpose. The court, therefore, discharged the rule, making the writ petition infructuous. It granted liberty to the petitioner to make a representation to the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara within four weeks and directed the Education Officer to decide the claim within three months thereafter. No order was made as to costs. The judgment did not address the merits of the original challenge or the tribunal's decision; it was purely procedural, recognizing that the change in circumstances had rendered the main relief moot. The reasoning was based on the practical extinction of the dispute regarding the appointment and the availability of an administrative forum for the residual wage claim.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Writ Petition - Infructuous - Where the main dispute regarding appointment of Head Master had become infructuous as the rival claimant retired and the petitioner was subsequently working as Head Master, and only a claim for wages during the interregnum survived, the High Court discharged the rule as infructuous and directed the Petitioner to make a representation to the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara for adjudication of the wage claim within a time frame - Held that the writ petition had become infructuous and no costs were ordered (Paras 2-3).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the writ petition has become infructuous and if so, what is the appropriate remedy for the petitioner regarding wages during the interregnum
Final Decision
Writ Petition dismissed as infructuous; liberty granted to petitioner to make representation to Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara within four weeks; Education Officer to decide within three months; no costs
Law Points
- Where the main dispute in a writ petition becomes infructuous and only an ancillary monetary claim survives
- the High Court may discharge the rule and relegate the party to the appropriate administrative authority for adjudication
