Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging School Tribunal Order Upholding Resignation Acceptance. Temporary Teacher's Resignation Withdrawal After Acceptance by Managing Committee Not Valid Under MEPS Act.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Prosecution
  • 6
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Smt. Susheela Srinivasan, was appointed as a temporary teacher in a school run by Respondent No.1 Management. She was appointed on 18.07.1994 for a period from 14.07.1994 to 30.04.1995. On 02.03.1995, she was allegedly forced to resign, and on 08.03.1995 she sent a resignation letter which was received by the school on 10.03.1995. The managing committee accepted the resignation on 11.03.1995. The petitioner withdrew the resignation on 12.03.1995, received on 13.03.1995, and also submitted a leave application on 14.03.1995. However, the school informed her on 20.03.1995 that her resignation had been accepted and she was released from service. The petitioner appealed to the School Tribunal, which dismissed the appeal on 19.10.2002. The petitioner then filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court. The court considered whether the withdrawal of resignation before the managing committee's formal decision on 18.03.1995 was valid. The court noted that the managing committee had accepted the resignation on 11.03.1995, which was before the withdrawal. The court held that the acceptance by the managing committee was valid and the subsequent withdrawal was ineffective. The petition was dismissed.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Resignation - Withdrawal of Resignation - Acceptance by Competent Authority - Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - The petitioner, a temporary teacher, sent a resignation letter which was received by the school on 10.03.1995 and accepted by the managing committee on 11.03.1995. The petitioner withdrew the resignation on 12.03.1995, received on 13.03.1995. The managing committee's decision on 18.03.1995 was after the withdrawal. The court held that the acceptance by the managing committee on 11.03.1995 was valid as per the Act, and the subsequent withdrawal was ineffective. (Paras 4-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the School Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal against termination by way of resignation, and whether the withdrawal of resignation before acceptance by the managing committee was valid.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. No order as to costs.

Law Points

  • Resignation
  • Withdrawal of resignation
  • Acceptance by competent authority
  • Temporary employee
  • MEPS Act 1977
  • School Tribunal
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (06) 99

WRIT PETITION NO. 3028 OF 2003

2026-06-24

M. M. Sathaye, J.

Mr. Vinayak R. Kumbhar a/w Mr. Rajendra B. Khaire & Mr. Aniket S. Phaple for the Petitioner. Mr. Anjani Kumar Singh i/b Mr. Ramesh Jaiswal for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. N.C. Walimbe, Addl. GP a/w Ms. S.D. Chipade, AGP for the State/Respondent No.3. Mr. V.S. Paradkar for Respondent No.4.

Smt. Susheela Srinivasan

Vidya Prasarak Mandal And Ors.

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging order of School Tribunal dismissing appeal against termination by way of resignation.

Remedy Sought

Petitioner sought to set aside the School Tribunal order and challenge the termination.

Filing Reason

Petitioner alleged unlawful termination by way of forced resignation and non-consideration of withdrawal of resignation.

Previous Decisions

School Tribunal dismissed the appeal on 19.10.2002.

Issues

Whether the School Tribunal erred in dismissing the appeal against termination by way of resignation. Whether the withdrawal of resignation before acceptance by the managing committee was valid.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner argued that the managing committee was not competent to accept resignation and that the withdrawal was before acceptance. Respondents argued that the resignation was accepted by the managing committee on 11.03.1995, before the withdrawal.

Ratio Decidendi

The managing committee's acceptance of resignation on 11.03.1995 was valid and the subsequent withdrawal on 12.03.1995 was ineffective as the resignation had already been accepted.

Judgment Excerpts

This petition is filed taking exception to order dated 19.10.2002 passed in Appeal No.MUM/44/1995 by Presiding Officer, School Tribunal Mumbai. The Petitioner was appointed in Respondent No.2 school run by Respondent No.1-Management.

Procedural History

Petitioner filed appeal before School Tribunal challenging termination. Tribunal dismissed appeal on 19.10.2002. Petitioner then filed writ petition in Bombay High Court on 02.09.2003, which was granted rule but interim relief rejected. Final hearing resulted in dismissal on 24.06.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977:
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition Challenging Disqualification of Bid in Tender Process for Distribution Franchisee — Violation of Natural Justice and Arbitrary Action by State Entity. The court quashed the disqualification of the petitioner's...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Upholds School Tribunal's Reinstatement Order in Teacher Termination Case — Probationary Appointment Not Completed, No Evidence of Reserved Post. The court held that the School Tribunal correctly found the teacher was appointed on...