1. By way of this petition, petitioner has prayed for following reliefs:
“(A) Your Lordships may be pleased to issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing and setting aside the order dt. 18.2.2000 passed by the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal in Application No.208/1996;
(B) Pending admission, hearing and disposal of this writ petition, Your Lordships may be pleased to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned order dated 18.2.2000 passed by the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal in Application No.208/1996”.
2. Brief facts of the present petition are as under:
2.1 The petitioner is a registered Sangh and is running an Ashram Shala in the village which is located in a tribal area, with the grant from the Government, since 1978. On 1.1.1981, respondent No.1 had joined the petitioner's Ashram Shala as a teacher.
2.2 It is the case of the petitioner that in 1991-92, the respondent No.1 had misbehaved with the Principal and therefore, a memo was issued to him and at the relevant point of time, respondent No.1 had submitted his apology and assured not to misbehave with anybody in the institution. It is further the case of the petitioner that even thereafter, it was observed that he was often misbehaving with the students, staff members and even Sangh Members. He was also using abusive language in the school which was creating a bad impression for the Ashram Shala.
2.3 On 1.10.1993, the respondent No.1 had beaten a student very badly and therefore, there was a great agitation by the students and their parents in the village.
2.4 Due to aforesaid incident, respondent No.1 was constrained to leave the village and run away with his family members.
2.5 It is the case case of the petitioner – Sangh that it called upon respondent No.1 to come and resume his duties many times, but respondent No.1 neither bothered to give any reply to any of the letters nor resumed his duties.
2.6 Since the study of the students was suffering, the petitioner-Trust proceeded for appointment of a new teacher in place of respondent No.1 within the knowledge of respondent No.2-Authority and the said fact was also informed to the respondent No.1.
2.7 Respondent No.1 thereafter, preferred an application before the Gujarat Primary Education Tribunal for reinstatement and back wages. The Tribunal has passed an order granting reinstatement as well as back wages from the date of application.
2.8 The petitioner is, therefore, constrained to approach this Hon'ble Court by way of filing the present petition.
3. Case of the Management is that respondent- original applicant was called upon to resume the duty. However, he has not resumed the duty and he absconded from the place and therefore, the order of the Tribunal is bad in law and deserves to be quashed and set aside.
4. Counsel for the respondent-original applicant has stated in his affidavit-in-reply, more particularly, paragraph No.3, which is stated as under:
“3. I file the preliminary reply only to oppose the admission and grant of any ad- interim relief. I reserve my right to reply a further affidavit in case it becomes necessary. I say that I will retire on 30.6.2000 (or at the end of the first term as per government circular). Therefore, unless I am allowed to resume duties immediately, the orders and directions in Application No.208/96, will become meaningless, and my long and continuous service of nearly 30 years, since 14.6.1971 will be jeopardized. Further, the grant of several notional benefits, calculations of pension and other benefits will also be seriously and adversely affected. I, therefore, pray that no interim relief be granted in favour of the petitioner and that I may be at least permitted to join duty immediately, as till the date of filing this affidavit on 26.4.2000, no interim order or stay of the order of the Tribunal dated 18.2.2000 has been obtained so far. Therefore, I am entitled to resume service. I state that the petitioner and the Principal are not allowing me to resume service with an ulterior motive. I am to retire on 30.6.2000, and school will close for summer vacation by the end of April, 2000. So if I do not resume duties now, I shall be deemed to have retired as far back as 6.12.1993, when the school and Principal orally terminated my services. My entire service period. Pension and other benefits will be seriously and adversely affected. Therefore, I pray that I may be permitted me to resume despite my going there even after the judgment on 7.4.2000, 10.4.2000 and 17.4.2000 to resume my post. I reiterate that there is no stay of the order in application No.208/96”.
5. Counsel for the respondent-original applicant further contended that no procedure is followed before terminating the services of the respondent-original applicant. Counsel for the respondent submitted that the order of the Primary Education Tribunal is just and proper and no interference is called for.
6. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides.
7. From the record, it seems that Tribunal while considering the case of the respondent-original applicant has observed that applicant deserves benefits under Section 40-B of the Bombay Primary Education Act. Therefore, the action of the management is contrary to the Bombay Primary Education Act and therefore, the said action is required to be quashed and set aside.
8. So far as reinstatement of the respondent- original applicant is concerned, the same is granted and regarding back wages, respondent-original applicant is entitled to the wages only from the date of termination till the respondent-original applicant has reached the age of superannuation. He may be entitled for the salary during that period.
9. The present petition is disposed of accordingly. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent.
(K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (ashish)