SOU KANCHAN SANJAY BHOPALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Sou Kanchan Sanjay Bhopale
State of Maharashtra and Others
Click here to view full judgement.
B. P. Colabawalla, J. -
(1.) By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner challenges the alleged illegal and unauthorized departmental inquiry sought to be continued against the Petitioner as per the chargesheet issued by Respondent No.3. It is the case of the Petitioner that as per the order passed by this Court dated 24th March 2015 and which came to be modified by the Supreme Court by its order dated 30th August 2016, the inquiry which was initiated against the Petitioner was required to be conducted and completed within three months from 30th August 2016. Since the said inquiry was not completed within the aforesaid time, it is the case of the Petitioner that the inquiry has automatically lapsed and the Petitioner is entitled to be reinstated and continued in service as the Head Mistress. This is the basic relief that is sought in the Writ Petition.
(2.) The very brief facts arising this controversy are that the Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 2nd October in a Primary School run by Respondent No.3. Thereafter, on 1st September 1988, the Petitioner was promoted as Head Mistress of the Primary School. It is the case of the Petitioner that since she resisted the statement of some false and fabricated bills, the School Management as a counterblast, issued a chargesheet on 19th August 1999 against the Petitioner. Thereafter, an inquiry was held. In that inquiry, the Petitioner was held guilty of misconduct and was dismissed from service on 20th January 2000 and the Appeal therefrom to the School Tribunal was also dismissed on 31st January 2003.
(3.) Being aggrieved by this dismissal orders, the Petitioner approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No.9237 of 2003. By judgment and order dated 24th March 2015, this Court set aside the order of the School Tribunal as well as the order of dismissal of the Petitioner and directed that the Petitioner be reinstated, but without any back wages. The Court however, held that the School Management was at liberty to hold a fresh departmental inquiry within a period of three months and that the issue of back wages would abide with the result of fresh inquiry proceedings.;
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.