The writ petition being Special Civil Application No.10111 of 2006 has been admitted vide order dated 3.5.2007. Present applicants are the petitioners in the said writ petition. In the said writ petition, the applicants herein - writ petitioners have challenged the order dated 29.11.2005 passed by respondent No.1 granting permission to close down the classes.
1.1 Subsequently, in 2011, the opponents herein have filed a separate writ petition wherein order dated 19.3.2010 passed by Primary Education Tribunal is brought under challenge. This Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anant S. Dave) under order dated 30.11.2011 directed the office to issue notice, making it returnable on 22.12.2011.
1.2 While passing the said order dated 30.11.2011, the Court, after considering the subject matter of the petition, also directed that the said petition (i.e. Special Civil Application No.17501 of 2011 filed by present opponents) should be heard with Civil Application No.4968 of 2011, i.e. present application.
2. So far as present application is concerned, the Court (Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anant S. Dave) has passed order dated 30.11.2011, i.e. on the same day when the order in writ petition being Special Civil Application No.17501 of 2011 was passed. It is directed that present application should be heard with Special Civil Application No.10111 of 2006, i.e. the petition filed by present applicants, and Special Civil Application No.17501 of 2011, i.e. the petition filed by present opponents.
3. Under the circumstances, two writ petitions, i.e. Special Civil Application Nos.10111 of 2006 and 17501 of 2011, are required to be considered along with present application.
4. It is true that on earlier occasion, i.e. on 9.11.2011, the Court had asked the respondents to clarify as to why appropriate order asking the respondent-trust to pay salary to the applicants from the date of the alleged termination order until 29.11.2005 should not be passed. It appears that subsequently, i.e. after the said order dated 9.11.2011 was passed, the opponents in present application filed their reply affidavit dated 28.11.2011 and after considering the reply affidavit, the Court passed order dated 30.11.2011 directing that both petitions be heard along with present civil application. Thus, even after considering the option of directing payment of the amount for the intervening period, after considering the reply affidavit dated 28.11.2011, the Court did not pass any order and instead, directed that matters shall be heard together.
4.1 Therefore, at this stage, the request made in present application is not granted.
4.2 However, considering the fact that vide order dated 3.5.2007 while admitting the petition, the Court has directed that Rule be expedited and considering the fact that the petitioners are not paid their salary for the intervening period from May-2004 until November-2005 and the question involved in the petitions is about the alleged termination of the petitioners, it is considered appropriate to direct the office to list the writ petition being Special Civil Application No.10111 of 2006 for Final Hearing in the week beginning from 2.7.2012.
Special Civil Application No.17501 of 2011 and present Civil Application shall also be listed along with Special Civil Application No.10111 of 2006 on that date.
(K.M.Thaker, J.) kdc Top