B. P. Dharmadhikari, J. - (1.) The petitioner in this petition is a Retired teacher of a primary school, who was promoted as Headmistress and whose promotion has been set aside on 15-3-1994 by the respondent No. 1 School tribunal in Appeal filed under section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private schools (Condition of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short) , by the present respondent No. 2. The respondent No. 3 is the management, while the respondent No. 4 is the Education Officer (Primary). The petitioner has retired on 31-3-1996 and till then she worked as Headmistress, in view of the interim orders passed by this Court. After her retirement the present intervener No. 1 Smt. Sheela Deshpande, has worked as Headmistress upto 30-6-2003 and thereafter the present respondent No. 2 was promoted as Headmaster by the Management.
(2.) The question required to be decided in this petition can be briefly stated as under:"how the Seniority of a teacher for his promotion to the post of headmaster of primary school is to be considered in view of the provisions of Rule 3 of the M. E. P. S. Rules, 1981 and clause 1 of schedule-F thereof - the School Tribunal has accepted the case of the respondent No. 2 that a trained teacher who is seniormost, considering the length of service part after taking is to be promoted as Headmaster/headmistress. In other words as per school Tribunal one who acquires training qualification earlier will rank senior.
(3.) The brief facts in which the said question arise can be stated thus: the petitioner in Writ Petition has stated that she has joined the service as primary teacher on 19-7-1971. However in her reply before the School Tribunal, the petitioner as also the Management has also stated that she was appointed on 12-9-1972. She obtained her professional qualification of D. Ed. , on 5-1-1982. The present respondent No. 2 who was appellant before the School Tribunal came to be appointed as teacher in primary school w. e. f. 1-8-1978. He was possessing D. Ed, qualification at the time of his recruitment itself. The vacancy against which the promotion has been effected, arose in July, 1989 and by order dated 5-7-1989, the respondent No. 3 Management promoted the petitioner as headmistress. The respondent No. 2 treated this as supercession of his claim and approached the respondent No. 1 School Tribunal in Appeal under section 9 of the Act, on or about 4-8-1992. As already stated above the School Tribunal has on 15-3-1994, accepted the contention of the respondent No. 2 and as the respondent No. 2 was possession training qualification from 1-8-1978 itself, while the present petitioner acquired it after him i. e. on 1-5-1982, the respondent no. 2 has been found to be seniormost trained teacher by the School Tribunal and accordingly the respondent No. 3 Management was directed to promote the respondent No. 2 in place of the petitioner.;