(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJAY MANOHAR SAHAI) 1. We have heard Mr. Kamlesh S. Kotai, learned counsel appearing for the appellants and Ms. Vacha Desai, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondent No.1.
2. This Letters Patent Appeal has been filed by the appellants - original petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 19.3.2012 passed by the learned Single Judge in Special Civil Application No.1918 of 2012 as well as the order dated 28.12.2011 passed by the Gujarat Secondary Education Tribunal in Application No.123 of 2011.
3. The brief facts are that the respondent No.2 is a Teacher working in the appellant School since 1987. The respondent No.2 was hearing a song on his mobile in the school and the Management considered it to be misconduct and the Management issued show-cause notice thrice which was replied by the respondent No.2 on all the occasions. Thereafter, the appellant Management imposed penalty of withholding one increment and recording adverse entry in ACR.
3.1. The said action of the Management was challenged by the respondent No.2 by filing Application No.123 of 2011 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 26.12.2011 allowed the application and quashed and set aside the orders dated 18.12.2010 and 3.8.2011. After examining the facts on record, the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the action taken by the Management was not justified and was in breach of principles of natural justice and proper procedure was not followed and no opportunity of defence was given before withholding one increment and recording adverse entry in ACR.
4. The appellants challenged the said order of the Tribunal by filing Special Civil Application No.1918 of 2012 and the learned Single Judge agreed with the view taken by the Tribunal and found that the notices were to the same effect and without giving any opportunity of defence, penalties were imposed upon the respondent No.2. From the record, we find that for playing songs on his mobile, the respondent No.2 has tendered his apology with the Management. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal as well as the learned Single Judge did not direct for holding any fresh inquiry as the charge against the respondent No.2 was trivial in nature. We agree with the view taken by the learned Single Judge.
5. In the result, this appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.
In view of dismissal of appeal, civil application does not survive and it is accordingly dismissed.
Sd/-
(V.M.SAHAI, J.) Sd/-
(S.G.SHAH, J.) Savariya