12.WP 650_2020

Blank Page for Writing Notes
Blank Page for Writing Notes

0
QPN—J-2491—MCJPN—1-2019—4.10,000(looae)—PA4, (Spl.—H,C,.A.S.,C,D.
PART
Constitution Matter (130)
Sr. Citizen - Petitioner
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE,
D.B.Wpst,No.242/20
o
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
DISTRICT: NagpuF
W.RNflBiyal /2020
.......... - Nos. ofÔ .
Application
■ a
Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur through its

President, Dr.'TUlsidas Vithiiji Gedam AppeHants;
i-
' O
{Advocate Mr. )
B. G. Kulkarni & S. N. Shende
a"
versus
State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Deptt. Of .....Respondents.

Higher and "Rchnical Education, Mumbai and others
*
A
(Advocate Mr. )
copy served to GP for R.No. 1 & 1
•y
I
CPN-J-2489-MCJPN-01-20I9-40,000 (Ioosc)-ALA4* - [Spl.-HC.,A.S.,C.D.78e.
4 APPELLATE SIDE (NAGPUR BENCH), NAGPUR
• Sr. Citizen - Petitioner
District :
D.B.Wpst.No.242/20 - Nagpur
Appeal W.P.NO. /2020

Application No. of 20
Writ Petition
Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur through its
President, Dr. "nilsidas Vithuji Gedam ...Appellants:
(Advocate Shri ■ B. G. Kulkarni & S. N. Shend*e
versus
State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Deptt.
Of Higher and Technical Education, Mumbai and Respondents,
others
(Advocate Shri copy served to GP for R.hio. 1 & 2
■ 9.0:0;-----------------------------------------------
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
Appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders
and Registrar’s orders
UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF

THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
Order impugned dated: 02.11.19 (Annx.J)
Petition filed on: 03/01/20
Objection removed on: -
And also for direction: as per prayer Cl (i)
for Admission?
Cirôr 31.01.20 with obj.
29/01720.
Caveat not file<
u/o.: 17(A to D)
[P.T.O.
2
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Corani, - >

Appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders
and Register’s orders
3i/rf\o f3 ■■
S a . Olm-sA cZ i
<=16 P Ci >
<3^1*
5’J
Drafted on
. Letter No.
Write No.
Order entered in the Register on

522wp650.20.odt 1/1

NAGPUR BENCH. NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.650 OF 2020

* (Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur .vs. State of Maharashtra and others)
Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,

appearances. Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.
and Registrar's Orders.
Mr.,6.G. Kulkami, Advocate for the petitioner,

Mr. A.M. Ghogare, AGP for respondent nos.l and 2.
CORAM: Nl'ITN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J, MANTRI. JJ.

DATE : JANUARY. 2024.
Office objections are to be removed within

three weeks from today, failing which, the petition shall
stand dismissed without further reference to the Court.
2. In case, if the office objections are removed,

place the matter on 14* February, 2024.
(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) SAMBRE, J.)
Gulande
GPN—J>2490—MCJPN—bl-2019—4,30,000 (Loose) >-*ALA4'*.
|Spl.—H.C..A.S.,C.D.79e.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.
m THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

*
. APPELLATE SIDE
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
DISTRICT : ‘
Appeal -
Application No.
Writ Petition of20
- Oflic Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

appearances. Court’s orders or directions -Court’s or Judge’s orders
and Registrar’s orders
Vocl(^
n
r
>fo
r
ria I*®®**
objcfiliona tamaw
f
&
fP.T.O. i
I
I ‘
GPN—J-1945—R(A|HCBN—04-2022—50.000 (Loose) —ALA4*. * • • i »’

[Spl—H.C.,A.S.,C.D.79fe5!;h.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

APPELLATE SIDE
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.’
DISTRICT :
Appeal.
Application
Writ Petition'
•No.
of20
'I'j
WP.No. 650/2020
• «> -
Office Notes, Office'Memoranda>oLCoram, *
----- appearances,’ Court’S-iorders-or’directions- t. ■“••'•Court’s or Judge’s orders
andvRegistrar’sorders
-J>
Ref, to CotirCs Order dtd. 17.01.2024 ;
di
Shri. B.G. Kulkarni, Adv. for Petitioner

has removed all office objections on
07.02.2024 (i.e. within time). .
GP. for R.Nos. 1 & 2 (Memo not filed).
Place the matter before the.Court for
Admission/Order as S.O. to 14.02.2024|
S.O A.S.O.
(Civil-II) (N.M.Wanktiede)
(Civil-II)
ii ■
• ,1
A/c (DB.)
I -
Ch&cked I’i"
• By
i;-' I'
/•‘I
I,
«
?'
‘ irr
• I
■ fp.T.a
BENCH AT NAGPUR
APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 650 OF 2020
Kalyan Education Society,nagpur Through ....PETITIONER

President Dr. Tulsidas Vithuji Gedam
V/S
State Of Maharashtra,through Secretary,dept. Of
....RESPONDENT
Higher And Technical Education And Others
BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNI for Petitioner

SHRI AM GHOGRE AGP FOR R-1 and 2 for Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY J. MANTRI,
JJ
DATE : 1st March, 2024
P.C. :
AT THE REQ. OF AGP S.O. TO 22/03/2024.
( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL )
Page 1/1
r
a
BENCH AT NAGPUR
Kalyan Education Society,nagpiir Through ....PETITIONER

V/S
State Of Maharashtrajhrough Secretary,dept. QIRESPONDENT
BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNl for Petitioner

ADV. NS RAO AGP R-1 and 2 for Respondent
CORAM ; HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABH AY J. MANTRl,
JJ
DATE : 22nd March, 2024
P.C.:
AT THE REQ. OF AGP S.O’.TO 29/04/2024.
( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL)
Pngs 1/2
BENCH AT NAGPUR
Kalyan Education Society,nagpur Through ....PETITIONER

V/S
State Of Maharashtra,through Secretary,dept. Of
....RESPONDENT
BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNI for Petitioner

COPY SERVED TO GP FOR R-1 and 2 for Respondent
CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

&
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE ABHAY J. MANTRI,
JJ
DATE : 29th April, 2024
P.C. :
BY CONSENT S.O. TO 24/06/2024.
( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL )
Page 1/1
1 j
A
sh^MI
®l r^w—la^PB
I!
IROBEE
Art' •
aolWB
• I'
’J^l^^^HARASHTRA
\t<>nB_—- • - ----------------- A 305053 j
V 0 5 oec iia
'1
feliJoi
Mr^JV o
I “11
‘lU^ll
si
(
'tW
■I)
■ ' ‘
0^1 g’J
St?.T.p Head Cleri I SyCkd'
q’ 'i ul
K« p'l jB^Sjfe sI
■JI ,
rife -W f
aS! ■
(EHURga i
■’ 1 awAR—^-^j———^^—
1^1
siiw s<" '
ff B
2^ *1
' 0ji
bwa^^vVu'
iS M £S®JU<
w• H i ;
F
*3 "■ w' * I
H
y
m
_ __ , Hijr-- V
aFIVI
-^'
•jLrij»/**~*«Aj>.^r.*j‘ *-iTLf-rLin ttr -_*■ *—u*Lf^ ** * * *• -

Qe-<t}L^
■j;v\dhc CaMTr^j- eft
6lBd
•Vi"! •••
U)-f jJl) 1^2^
— K;5jV«>'Y> -^Qi^Xn "SoQS^^ |V<?(aA<^
•I'' (?yTAt?g yr^g>'g

A*'<?a^y|
«5ri^’ ■ W
cd; 42. feX'rij'yj^r -
K
1
(^,-T®
. Vx. '’’•^ -••‘jcClAlO

i
A
. ». '
•’t
S'
*.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR-
Writ Petition No. /2020
PETITIONER Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur

VERSUS
RESPONDENTS State of Maharashtra and 2 others.
INDEX
Sr. Anne- Particulars Date Page
No. xures Nos.
1. Synopsis, dates and event. 02.01.2020 I-IV
Petition under article 226 of
2. the Constitution of India is 02.01.2020 1-12
f
duly sworn.
3. List of Annexures. 02.01.2020 13-14
The copy of charge sheet
4. A served by the petitioner to 25.09.2017 15-23
respondent No.3.
The copy of order of
suspension issued by the
5. B 11.06.2018 24-25
petitioner to respondent
No.3.
The copy of application
6. C submitted by petitioner to 14.05.2018 -26-
respondent No.2.
The copy of order issued by
7. D the petitioner to respondent 27.09.2018 -27-
No.3.
The copy of letter issued by
8. E 13.08.2018 -28-
the petitioner to the Bank.
i
i d
II

9. F 13.03.2019 -29-
10. G 14.03.2019 -30-
The copy of order passed by
the Grievances Committee in
11. H 08.08.2019 31-41
Grievance Petition
No.02/2019.
The copy of letter submitted
12. I by respondent No.3 to 07.10.2019 -42-
respondent No.2.
13. J respondent No.2 to 02.11.2019 -43-
respondent No.3.
The copy of the judgment
passed by this Hon'ble court
14. K 24.08.2016 44-51
in writ petition No.
6274/2015.
NAGPUR
DATED: 02.01.2020
4 *
4-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

VERSUS
SYNOPSIS/ DATES AND EVENTS
Sr. Date Particulars

No.
Petitioner No.l is an educational society
1.
which has established various institutions
including Shri ChakrapanI Arts College,
Nagpur which is 100% grant in aid college
affiliated to R.T.M. , Nagpur University,
Nagpur.
2. 01.01.2008 Respondent No.2 was appointed as the
Principal of the College and the said
appointment was approved by the University.
3. 25.09.2017 In view of various commissions and
omissions on the part of respondent No.3
including financial irregularities and mis-
appropriation of college amount of
Rs.3,59,656/- charge sheet dated
25.09.2017 was served upon respondent
No.3 by the petitioner.

II
4. Departmental enquiry was started by
appointing enquiry officer by providing full
opportunity to respondent No.3 to defend
himself. However it was noticed that
respondent No.3 by using his position of
Principal was influencing and threatening the
witnesses.
5. 14.05.2018 Though there is no provision regarding
seeking of prior permission for placing
teacher/employee under suspension, by way
of abundant caution petitioner had submitted
application dated 14.05:2018 to respondent
No.2 for prior permission. Respondent No.2
did not take any cognizance.
6. 11.06.2018 Respondent No.3 was placed under
suspension till the conclusion of enquiry
proceedings.
7 27.09.2018 The enquiry proceedings were concluded on
27.09.2018. Hence as per order dated
27.09.2018 the petitioner had revoked the
suspension.
8. 50% of salary was paid by the petitioner to
respondent No.3 towards susbistance
allowance (Rs.3,16,606.50)
III
9. Respondent No.3 had filed Grievance Petition
No.02/2019 before the Grievances
Committee of the University claiming 100%
salary during the period of suspension. The
petition was contested.
10. 08.08.2019 The Grievances Committee had accepted the

claim for entitlement of 100% salary and had
issued direction to the Management to pay
balance amount of salary.
11. The college is 100% grant in aid college and
during the period from 11.06.2018 to.

30.09.2018 salary of respondent No.3 was
not claimed from respondent No.2 and was
not released by respondent No.2.
12. 07.10.2019 In view of above position the salary bill for

the period from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018
was submitted to respondent No.2 by

respondent No.3.
13. 02.11.2019 Respondent No.2 has returned the bill
alleging that the Grievances Committee had

■*
directed the Management to pay the balance
salary for the period of suspension.
14. 27.06.2018 The controversy has been decided by this

4!
Hon'ble court as per judgment dated
27.06.2016 passed in writ petition
No.6274/2015.
fl
•v’4 •’
IV
15. Act The Constitution of India.
16 Authorities The necessary authorities will 'be relied upon

at the time of hearing of the petition.
17. Points to be heard;-
a) When the coiiege is on 100% grant in aid basis and when

for the period from 11,06.2018 to 30,09.2018 saiary of
respondent No.3 was not ciaimed and was not reteased by
respondent No,2, whether the impugned action of
respondent No.2 is sustainable in the eyes of law?
b) Whether the impugned action of respondent No.2 is

arbitrary and violative of article 14 of the Constitution of
India when there is no statutory provision requiring prior
permission of respondent No.2 for suspension of
teacher/employee?
NAGPUR
DATED: QÔl.2020 COUNSEL FOR P^TIONER
(B.G.KUIk^ni)
^p.ofRs-
Section Ofwer
CivH Ooponmont
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT
BOMBAY. NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. ^<5^ /2020
IN THE MATTER OF CHALLENGE TO THE ARBITRARY
ACTION OF RESPONDENT NO.2 REFUSING TO RELEASE
SALARY OF RESPONDENT NO.3 DURING THE PERIOD
OF SUSPENSION EVENTHOUGH THE COLLEGE IS ON
100% GRANT IN AID BASIS
UNDER
THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
[Act Code No. 130, Petition Code No. 35/25]
PETITIONER s- Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur

through its President Dr.Tuisidas
Vithuji Gedam, aged 95 yrs., office at
CoRf Unmesh, 103, Tikekar Road, Dhantoli,
Nagpur.
VERSUS
RESPONDENTS: 1. State of 'Maharashtra through its

Secretary, Department of Higher and
Technical Education, Mantralaya,
Mumbai-32.
2. The Joint Director of Higher

Education, Nagpur Division, Civil
Lines, Nagpur
2
3. Dr.Ratnakar Ramaji Da hat, aged

major, Occu.-Service, the Principal
Shri Chakrapani Arts College,
Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur.
PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE
CONSTITUTION OF INDIA
The petitioner named above most respectfully begs to
submit as under.
01. That being aggrieved by totally arbitrary and
unjustified action on the part of respondent No.2 refusing to
release salary of respondent Nc:3 for the period from
11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018, the period during which

respondent No.3 was placed under suspension, the petitioner
is constrained to approach this Hon'ble court invoking extra
ordinary writ jurisdiction under article 226 of the Constitution
of India. Admittedly the college established by petitioner
society is grant in aid college. Similarly for the period from
11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018, salary for the post of Principal
was not claimed and hence not released by respondent No.2.
More importantly there is no provision for prio^ permission
from respondent Nos.l and 2 for suspension of the employee
of the college. Hence it was and it continues to be the
obligation of respondent No.2 to sanction the salary bills of
respondent No.3 for the said period and to release

3 -
salary. The action of refusal to release the salary is therefore
. ex facie arbitrary and violative of article 14 of the
Constitution of India. The facts leading to the filing of instant

J
petition are stated in detail as under.
02. That the petitioner is an educational society and has
established various institutions including Shri ChakrapanI
Arts College, Nagpur. The said college is grant in aid college
affiliated to Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur University,
Nagpur. Respondent No. 2 is the competent Authority
responsible for releasing the salary and non-salary grants of
the college. It Is submitted that respondent No.3 was
appointed as the Principal of the college on 01.01.2008. His
appointment was duly approved by the University.
03. The petitioner submits that respondent No.3 was found
to have indulged in various commissions and omissions
including serious financial Irregularities and financial
misappropriation. Total misappropriation of college amount
committed by respondent No.3 was to the tune of
Rs.3,59,656/-. In view of the said commissions, the
petitioner had served a charge sheet dated 25.09.2017 upon
respondent No.3. The copy of charge sheet dated
25.09.2017 served by the petitioner to respondent No.3 is
annexed hereto and marked as Annexure A. It is submitted
that after receipt of reply dated 01.11.2017 to the charge

4 >
sheet, the Enquiry Officer was appointed and Enquiry
proceedings were started. The Enquiry officer had
commenced the proceedings, in compiiance of principles of
natural justice. The delinquent was permitted to appoint
advocate to defend him. Similarly copies of all documents
were supplied. The opportunity of inspection of documents
was also granted and copies of earmarked documents were
supplied. However it was noticed that by using the position
of the Principal, respondent No.3 was found to be influencing
the Management witnesses. Therefore eventhough the
respondent No.3 was not suspended at the initial stage, the
petitioner had no option but to suspend respondent No.3 in
order to ensure fair conduct of enquiry. The respondent No.3
was therefore placed under suspension as per order dated
11.06.2018. The copy of order of suspension dated
11.06.2018 issued by the petitioner to respondent No.3 is
annexed hereto and marked as Annexure B.
04, It is respectfully submitted that there is no provision in
any of the ordinances or statutes framed by the University
prescribing the requirement of obtaining prior permission
from either the University or from respondent No.2 for
suspending the teaching staff or non-teaching staff. Then
also the petitioner had submitted application dated
14.05.2018 to respondent No.2 seeking permission from
respondent No.2 for suspending respondent No.3. The copy

5
of application dated 14.05.2018 submitted by petitioner to
respondent No. 2 is annexed hereto as Annexure C. in view
of the fact that there is no statutory provision requiring such
permission, the application dated 14.05.2018 was submitted
by the petitioner by way of abundant caution.
05. It is submitted that the enquiry proceedings were
concluded on 27.09.2018. Hence the petitioner management
had taken immediate action of revoking the suspension and
reinstatement of respondent No.3. The copy of order dated
27.09.2018 issued by the petitioner to respondent No.3 is
annexed hereto and marked as Annexure D. It is submitted
that for the period of suspension from 11.06.2018 to
30.09.2018, the petitioner management had . paid the
subsistence allowance equivalent to 50% of the salary on
13.08.2018, 13.03.2019 and 14.03.2019. (Total
Rs.3,16,606.50/-). The copies of letters dated 13.08.2018,
13.03.2019 and 14.03.2019 issued by the petitioner to the
Bank are annexed hereto and marked as Annexures E.F
and G respectively.
06. It is submitted that after conclusion of enquiry the
Enquiry Officer had submitted the Enquiry Report to the
petitioner on 12.11.2018. The copy of enquiry report was
supplied to respondent No.3 as per letter dated 28.01.2019
and the respondent No.3 had submitted explaination dated

6
19.02.2019. The Executive Committee of the petitioner
society had accepted the report of enquiry in the meeting
held on 27.02.2019 and had proposed the punishment of
termination from service. Accordingly show cause notice
dated 01.03.2019 was issued by the petitioner to respondent
No.3. Respondent No.3 had submitted explaination on
19.02.2019. The Executive committee of the petitioner
society had as per resolution dated 19.03.2019 finalized the
punishment of termination from service, after obtaining prior
permission from the University. The petitioner society had
submitted the proposal dated 29.03.2019 to the University.
The proposal is pending before the University.
07. It is submitted that respondent No.3 had filed
Grievance Petition No.02/2019 before the Hon'ble Grievance
Committee of the University seeking the relief that he was
entitled for full salary during the period from 11.06.2018 to
26.09.2018. The petition was contested by the petitioner
management. The petition was partly allowed by the
Grievances Committee as per order dated 08.08.2019
directing the petitioner management to pay balance amount
of salary to respondent No.3 (50% amount). It was held
that the respondent No.3 was entitled for full salary during
the period of suspension. Though the order passed by the
Grievances Committee is basically erroneous, the issue
involved in the present petition is when for the said period

7
the salary of respondent No.3 was not claimed from the
salary grants, whether respondent No.2 can refuse to release
the salary of respondent No.3. The copy of order dated
08.08.2019 passed by the Grievances Committee in
Grievance Petition No.02/2019 is annexed hereto and
marked as Annexure H.
08. It is submitted that in natural course as the salary for
the period from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 was not drawn by
the college from salary grants, the bills were submitted to
respondent No.2 by respondent No.3 on 07.10.2019. The
copy of letter dated 07.10.2019 submitted by respondent
No.3 to respondent No.2 is annexed hereto and marked as
Annexure 1. Respondent No.2 as per letter dated
02.11.2019 has refused to sanction the bills and has
returned the salary bills alleging that as per the directions of
the Grievances Committee, the Management is responsible
for payment of outstanding amount during the period of
suspension. The copy of letter dated 02.11.2019 issued by
respondent No.2 to respondent No.3 is annexed hereto and
marked as Annexure J.
09. It is respectfully submitted that when:the college is on
100% grant in aid and when the salary for the post of
Principal for the period from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 was
not claimed from respondent No.2 and admittedly was not

8
released by respondent No.2, the action of refusing to
sanction the salary bills on the part of respondent No.2 is
totally arbitrary and unjustified. The issue has been already
decided by this Hon'ble court as per the judgment dated

^^2^00.2016 passed in writ petition No. 6274/2015. The copy
of the judgment dated 2^.00.2016 passed by this Hon'ble
court in writ petition No. 6274/2015 is annexed hereto and
marked as Annexure K. In view of these circumstances the
petitioner is left with no other alternate much less an
efficacious remedy in the matter but to approach this Hon'ble
court invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction under article
226 of the Constitution of India in the present petition.
10. The petitioner submits that undisputediy the college is
on 100% grant in aid basis and the salary grants are
released by respondent No.2. It also cannot be disputed that
from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 the salary amounts payable
to respondent No.3 were not claimed by the petitioner and
were not released by respondent No.2. In normal course, if
there would not have been suspension of respondent No.3
from service, respondent No.2 would have released the
salary of respondent No.3 without any objection and
difficulty. For compelling circumstances respondent No.3
was placed under suspension. This is not the case of double
payment of salary but the case is of payment of unpaid
salary. There is no statutory provision under which the^

9
petitioner was required to obtain prior permission of
respondent No.2 for suspension of respondent No.3. Then
also by way of an abundant caution application dated
14.05.2018 was submitted by the petitioner to respondent
No.2 for grant of permission to place respondent No.3 under
suspension. Respondent No.2 did not take any cognizance of
the said application. As the college is on 100% grant in aid
and as no salary of the post of Principal was claimed and
released'for the period from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 the
refusal by respondent No.2 to release the unpaid salary of
respondent No.3 Is ex facie arbitrary.
11. The petitioner respectfully submits that eventhough the
Hon'ble Grievances Committee has held that respondent
No.3 would be entitle for full salary during the period of
suspension and eventhough the direction was issued to the
management for payment of balance salary, respondent No.2
cannot avoid the responsibility of payment of unpaid salary
on that count. This Hon'ble court even in the case of setting
aside of termination order with a direction to payment of
backwages has held that in case of grant In aid institution the
responsibility of payment of back-wages cannot be refused
by the competent Authority. The case in hand stands on
better footing in as much as the claim is only for the period
of suspension. Hence it is a much stronger case for directing
respondent No.2 to sanction the salary bills of respondent^

10
No.3 for the period from 11.06.2018 to 30.09.2018 and to
release the full salary of respondent No.3. In natural course
respondent No.3 would be under a legal obligation to refund
the amount received by him from the management to the
management. In view of settled legal position the impugned
communication dated 02.11.2019 Issued by respondent No.2
is liable to be quashed and set aside.
12. The petitioner submits that the petitioner has
established an unimpeachable case both on .facts and in Law.
As a matter of fact the controversy has been already decided
by this Hon'ble court. In view of the law laid down by this
Hon'ble court, the impugned communication issued by
respiondent No.2 cannot be sustained in the eyes of law.
Eventhough the college is on 100% grant in aid and
eventhough the salary payment of respondent No.3 was not
claimed and released for the period from 11.06.2018 to
30.09.2018, respondent No.2 has returned the salary bills
and has refused to release the salary. In view of these
circumstances it is expedient in the interest of justice to hear
and decide the petition at the stage of admission.
13. The petitioner declares that the petitioner has not
moved this Hon'ble court or the Hon'ble Supreme court of
India In the present matter at any time hereinbefore.

11
14. The petitioner declares that the petitioner has not
received notice of caveat from the respondents till the date
of filing of instant petition.
15. The petitioner undertakes to file translated copies of
vernacular annexures if so directed by this Hbn'ble Court.
PRAYER:- It is therefore prayed that this Hon'ble
Court be pleased to:-
i) by a writ of mandamus or by a
suitable writ, order or direction
respondent No. 2, the Joint Director of
Higher Education, Nagpur be directed
to sanction the salary bills of
respondent No.3, and to release the
salar/ of respondent No.3 for the
period from 11.06.2018 to

30.09.2018 within a period of two
weeks from the date of the order.
H) By a writ of mandamus or by a
suitable writ, order or direction the
communication dated 02.11.2019
(Annexure J) issued by respondent
No.2, the Joint Director of Higher
Education, Nagpur may kindly be
quashed and set aside.

12
iii) In view of limited controversy
involved in the petition and earlier
decision of this Hon'ble court, the
petition may kindly be heard and
decided at the stage of admission.
iv) Grant any other relief. including
costs, which this Hon'ble Court may
deem fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
NAGPUR
DATED ;^.O1.2O2O COUNSEU FCm PETITIONER
(BXmKULKARNI)
SOLEMN AFFIRMATION
I, Dr.Tulsidas Vithuji Gadnm, aged 95 yrs., President,

Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur through its office at
Unmesh, 103, Tikekar Road, Dhantoli, Nagpur, the petitioner
' N a
[B
do hereby take oath and state and submit that the contents
in Paras 01 to 15 in the petition are true to my personal
Fl knowledge, belief and information. The legal submissions are
as per the information received from my counsel and
believed to be true by me.
Hence verified and signed at Nagpur on this
.day of January, 2020. .
(K
I know & Identify
the Deponent Deponent
(B.G.Kul
Advocate
■zy thia —S—^M.£2r«
Section Owieer
Higft Court of Bombay
mr Bench. Nagpur
13
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

VERSUS
LIST OF ANNEXURES
Sr. Anne- Particuiars Date Page

No. xures Nos.
The copy of charge sheet
1. A served by the petitioner to 25.09.2017 15-23
respondent No.3.
The copy of order of
suspension issued by the
2. B 11.06.2018 24-25
petitioner to respondent
No.3.
The copy of appiication
3. C submitted by petitioner to 14.05.2018 -26-
respondent No.2.
The copy of order issued by
4. D the petitioner to respondent 27.09.2018 -27-
No.3.
The copy of ietter issued by
5. E 13.08.2018 -28-
6. F 13.03.2019 -29-
1, G 14.03.2019 -30-
The copy of order passed by
8. H the Grievances Committee in 08.08.2019 31-41
Grievance Petition No.02/2019.
The copy of letter submitted
9. 1 by respondent n6.3 to 07.10.2019 -42-
respondent No.2.
10. 3 respondent No.2 to 02.11.2019 -43-
respondent No.3.
The copy of the judgment
passed by this Hon'ble court
11. K 24.08.2016 44-51
in writ petition No.
.6274/2015.
NAGPUR
COUNSEL FOR îTTTONER
DATED: 02.01.2020
(B.GXKiârni)
i
/« ■ •
■ ■/ .
To,
NO •
Dr.Ratnakar Dahat,
Principal,
' Shri.Chakrapati Arts College,
. .Nagpur,
Subject;- Charge Sheet.
. As per the decision of the Managing Committee of Kalyan

Education Society, Nagpur the present charge sheet is being
served upon you incorporating following charges in view of
commissions and omissions on your part. The copies of
documents which are being relied upon in support of the charges
are also being served upon you along with this charge sheet.
You are requested to submit your reply to the charge sheet
within a period of 15 days from the date of receipt of this charge
sheet. It is made clear that should you fail to submit your reply
within stipulated period it would be presumed that you do not
wish, to submit the reply and further course of action would be
initiated as per rules.
01.. Charge No.l:- While working as Principal of Shri r
Chakrapani Arts College, Nagpur, Dr. Ratnakar Dahat had

•brought out college magazine in the year 2010-11 for which an
amount of Rs.35,550/- was alleged to have been paid to the II
Printer. However it was revealed that magazine itself was not

published and amount of Rs.35,550/- was shown to be an 0
expenditure on that count. Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had released the

. payment in cash by fabricating the bill with the forged signature
. of Smt.Dipika Patil. The alleged bill dated 15.04.2010 itself is
misleading because as per bill itself the amount should have i
been Rs.255O6/- while the amount was shown to be Rs.35500/-.

Thus Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had committed a financial irregularity
and misappropriation of the amount of Rs.35,550/-. The said
conduct on the part of Dr.Dahat amounts to serious misconduct.
-16-
2
02. Charge No.2;- V/hile working as Principal of Shri

Ghakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had
. misappropriated an amount of Rs,30972/- in the year 2012-13.
. An amount of Rs.2,'47,693/- was collected in the college from
the. students while expenditure of Rs.2,16^721/- was, taken in
records. Firstly the amounts collected from the students were
not deposited in the bank account.and was retained in cash.
Secondly, cash expenditure of Rs.2,16,721/- was shown to have
been incurred in the record. The balance amount of Rs.30,972/-
was not deposited in the bank account and was. thus
The said amount was not carried forward as
misappropriated.
balance amount in the income-expenditure account. The
particulars of actual receipts, expenditure and balance amounts
are stated in the following table.
. Month Amount Amount spent Balance
received II. amount
I III
Aprih.2012 800 600 200
May..2O12 . _ ___ 00 900 (-)900
June,,2012 52490 25360 27130
July..2O12. . 61890 9145 52472
August.,2012 36520 75987 (-)39467
September..2O12 14825 36815 (-)21990
October,,2012__ ; 6850 6566 284
November,,2012 15438 7835 7603
December..2012 15666 32384 (-)16718
January..2013 33624 6650 26974
February..2013 _____ 00 .4904 (-)4904
March..2013 9590 9575 _______ 15
Total 247693 216721 30972
The fact that, no amount was deposited in bank account is

confirmed from the record. Thus entire amounts were handled
in cash by Dr.Dahat. Similarly the balance amount of
Rs.30,972/- was never deposited in the Bank, Account. The said
amount was also not carried forward as on 01.04.2013. Thus
Dr.Dahat, .had indulged in financial irregularities,
misappropriation of amount of Rs.30,972/-. The said conduct on
the part of Dr.Dahat amounts to serious misconduct.
X
3
-.03. Charge No.3;- While .working as - Principal of Shri

Chakrapani Arts college, .Nagpur, Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had issued
two cheqes (bearer cheques) in the name of Shri.Shivram
Pandurang Vairkar the first on 01.08.2014 for Rs. 15000/- from
the salary account of the college at Bank of Maharashtra,
Ayodhya Nagar Branch and the second on 11.11.2014 for
Rs.20.000/- from the scholarship account of the college at Bank
■ ■ . of India, Hudkeshwar Road Branch. In what circumstances and
■ . for what reasons the cheques were issued in favour of
. Shri.S.P.Vairkar is not mentioned in the record. Similarly, under
what authority the bearer cheques were issued is also not stated
in the records. As per the statement of Shri.Vairkar he was
directed by Dr. Dahat to withdraw the amounts from the Bank
and hand over the cash to Dr.Dahat. According to
Shri.S.P.Vairkar he had withdrawn the amounts from the Bank
and had handed over cash to Dr.Dahat. Though the payments
have been shown in the accounts having been made to
Shri.S.P.Vairkar, the amount of Rs.35000/- in cash was handed
over by Shri.Vairkar to Dr.Dahat. Thus Dr’Dahat had indulged
into financial irregularities and misappropriation of amount of
Rs.35000/-. The said conduct on the part of Dr.Dahat amounts
to serious misconduct.
04. Charge No.4;- While working as the Principal of Shri

Chakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had issued a 5
cheque No.46893 dated 27.03.2014 for Rs.90000/- as "to self".

, The cheque'was issued by Dr.Dahat on the salary account at
Bank of Maharashtra, Ayodhya Nagar Branch. Dr.Dahat had
withdrawn the amount of Rs.90000/- and there are no entries
about the utilization of the amount of Rs.90000/- any where.
Similarly there is no voucher on the record to establish as to for
what purpose and reason the personal withdrawal was effected
by. Dr.Dahat. Except the bank entry about personal cash
withdrawal there is no evidence to justify the said withdrawal
from salary account. Similarly there being no entry about the
utilization of amount of Rs.90000/-, the entire amount was
J
/
A
4
-10.-.
misappropriated by Dr.Dahat. The said conduct on the part of
Dr.Dahat amounts to serious misconduct.
i
05. Charge No.S:- While working as the Principal of Shri
Chakrapani Arts college, Nagpur, Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had
temporarily misappropriated an amount of Rs.90000/-. Medical
reimbursement bill of. Smt.Vaishali Patil, Librarian was
sanctioned by the competent authority and an amount of
Rs.93452/- was redicted in the salary account of the college pn
14.02.2015. It was the. obligation of Dr.Dahat to transfer the
:• said amount in the account of Smt.Vaishali Patil immediately.
However by a self cheque bearing cheque No.46893 Dr.Dahat
• had withdrawn an amount of Rs.90000/- on 27.02.2015.
Thereafter on 27.03.2015 Dr.Dahat had deposited an amount of
Rs.90000/- in cash in the salary account and on 27.03.2015, the
âmount of Rs.93,452/- was transferred to the account of
Smt.Vaishali Patil. When the amount was to be transferred in
the account of Smt.Vaishali Patil, there was no occasion for
Dr.Dahat to effect personal . withdrawal of Rs.90000/- on
27.02.2015 and then to deposit the amount on 27.03.2015.
Thus apart from financial irregularity Dr.Dahat had indulged in
temporary misappropriation of amount of Rs.90000/-. The said
conduct on the part of Dr.Dahat amounts to-serious misconduct.
06. Charge No,6;- While working as Principal of Shri

Chakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had
misappropriated an amount of Rs.16573/- in the year 2014-15.
An amount of Rs. 176952/- was collected in the college from the
studente while expenditure of Rs. 159379/- was taken in records.
Firstly the amounts collected from the students were not
«
deposited in the bank account and was retained in case.
Secondly cash expenditure of Rs. 159379/- was shown to have
b.qen incurred in the record. The balance amount of Rs. 16573/-
was not deposited in the bank account and was thus
I
misappropriated. The said amount was not carried forward as a
balance amount in the income-expenditure account. The
S
a
j
!
•
I
• .. ■
- 19'
A 5
particulars of actual receipts; expenditure and balance amounts

are stated in the following table.
Month Amount Amount spent Balance
received . . II . amount
.1___ III
April..2O14 * 23800 11475 12325
May,.2O14 3500 18827 (-)15327
June..2014 13840 17788 (-)3948
July„2014 18435 45022 (-)26587
Adgust,.2O14 25545 2660 22885
September..2O14 ■ 23600 15442 8158
Qctober..2014 30000 5610 24390
November,,2014 17006 1768 15238
December.,2014 4386 24527 (-)20141
January..2O14 5000 12590 (-)7590
February..2O14 10840 2290 8550
March.,2014 • ____ 00 1380 (■)1380
Total . 175952 159379 __ 16573
The fact that no amount was deposited in bank account is

'in cash by ■ Dr.Dahat. Similarly the balance amount of
Rs.16573/- was never deposited In the Bank Account. The said
amount was also not carried forward as on 01.04.2015. Thus
Dr.Dahat had indulged in misappropriation of amount of
Rs.16573/-, The said conduct on the part of Dr.Dahat amounts
to-serious misconduct.
07, Charge No.7:- While working as Principal of Shri

Chakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had
misappropriated an amount of Rs.36520/‘ in the year 2015-16.
An amount of. Rs.191581/- was collected in the college from the
students while expenditure of Rs. 155061/- was taken in records.
Firstly the amounts collected from the students were not
deposited in the bank account and was retained in case.
Secondly cash expenditure of Rs.155061/-, was shown to have
been incurred in the record. The balance amount of Rs.3652O/-
. was not deposited in the bank account and was thus
misappropriated. The said amount was not carried forward as
balance amount in the . income-expenditure account. The
6
particulars of actual receipts, expenditure and balance amounts

■ are stated in the following table.
Month Amount Amount spent Balance
received II amount
I III
April,,2015 800 1245 (-)445
May,.2O15 ___ :___ 00 _________ 500 (-)500
June,,2015 7030 _______17213 (-)10183
July„2015 ■ ‘ 31575 28209 3366
August..2O15 . 14240 _ ______ 5274 8966
Sieptember,.2O15 57490 14144 43346
October^,, 2015 Lj__ 00 ________9155 (-)9155
November,,2015 20406 ________3338 17068
December,,2015 8440 _______ 4193 4247
January,,2016 ____ 00 ________5810 (-)5810
February,,2016 51600 _______ 1070' 50530
March,,2016 ____ 00 64910 (-)64910
Total 191581 __ __ 155061 36520
The fact that no amount was deposited in bank account is

in cash by. Dr.Dahat,' Similarly the balance amount of
Rs.36520/- was never deposited in the Bank Account. The said
•: amount was also not carried forward as on 01.04.2016. Thus i
Dr.Dahat had indulged in misappropriation of amount of

Rs.36520/-. The said conduct on the part of Dr.Dahat amounts
to serious misconduct.
08. Charge No.8:- While working as Principal of Shri

Chakrapani Arts college, Nagpur, Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had issued
two cheqes (bearer cheques) in the name of Dr.Ankush Barmate
the first on 29.09.2015 for Rs.40000/- fronji the salary account
of the college at Bank of Maharashtra, Ayodhya Nagar Branch
. and the second on 25.02.2016 for Rs.50000/- fromphe
scholarship account of the college at Bank of India, Hudkeshwar
Rpad Branch. In what circumstances and for what reasons the
cheques were issued in favour of Dr.Ankush Barmate is not
mentioned in the record. Similarly, under what authority the
bearer cheques were issued is also not stated in the records. As
per the statement of Dr.Barmate he was directed by Dr.Dahat to
withdraw the amounts from the Bank and hand over the cash to
21
s 7
Dr.Dahat. According to Dr.Ankush Brmate he had withdrawn the

amounts-from the Bank and had handed over cash to Dr.Dahat.
Though the payments have been shown in the accounts having !
. been made to Shri.S.P.Valrkar, the amount of Rs.90000/- in i
cash was handed over by Dr.Barmate to Dr.Dahat. Thus
■ Dr.Dahat had indulged into financial irregularities and
misappropriation of amount of Rs.90000/-. The said conduct on
the part of Dr.Dahat amounts to serious misconduct.
09. Charge No.9;- While working as the Principal of Shri

Ghakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat had issued a
. cheque No.101145 dated 19.05.2016 for Rs.25000/- as "to self".
The cheque was issued by Dr.Dahat on the salary account at
Bank of Maharashtra, Ayddhya Nagar Branch. Dr.Dahat had
. withdrawn the amount of Rs.25000/- and there are no entries
. about the utilization of the amount of Rs.25000/- anywhere.
. Similarly there is no voucher on the record to establish as to for
what purpose and reason the personal withdrawal was effected
by Dr.Dahat. Except the bank.entry about personal cash
withdrawal there is no evidence to justify the said withdrawal
from salary account. Similarly there being no entry about the
utilization of amount of Rs.25000/-, the 'entire amount was
misappropriated by Dr.Dahat. The said coriduct on the part of
Dr.Dahat amounts to serious misconduct.
10- Charge. No. 10;- While working as the Principal of Shri

Ghakrapani Arts College, Nagpur Shri.Ratnakar Dahat has
indulged in serious dereliction of duties. Being the Principal of
the college Dr.Dahat was administrative head of the college
responsible for maintaining upto date accounts of the college
being the custodian. Daily cash book and ledger are the primary
•and basic requirements to be maintained in regular course of
busiriess. The entries in the cash book are to be taken every
day and it is obligatory for the Principal to sign the entries in the
cash book and ledger, it is revealed that Dr.Dahat has not
signed the cash book and ledger book entries for last four years
^22..
8
■ (01.04.2013 ■ to 31.03.2014, 01.04.2014 to 31.03.2015,

: 01.04.2015 to 31.03.2016 and 01.04.2016 to 31.03.2017 as
well as from 01.04.2017 onwards) Thus Dr.Dahat has shown
. ..utter negligence in his duties and responsibilities which finally
amounts to dereliction of duties and hence misconduct.
’ 11- Cliarge No.il;- While working as the Principal of Shri
Chakrapat! Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat is found to I
5
be careless and negligent, in his duties and responsibilities. As

per U.G.C. directions and condition imposed by the State
Government, accreditation of the college by National
• Accreditation and Assessment Council is mandatory. The
Principal of the college, is required to take all steps and finalize
the report to be submitted to NAAC. The management time and
. again had instructed Dr.Dahat to * prepare the report for
submission to NAAC and to request the Council to depute
committee. Despite repeated instructions till'today Dr.Dahat has
not taken any initiative for submitting the report to NAAC; The
fees for NAAC accreditation have been now increased manyfolds
to Rs.4,00,000/". The college also cannot claim any financial
assistance from U.G.C. as accreditation has not been done. Thus
Dr.Dahat has not shown any interest in college Development and
its . accreditation by NAAC despite being his duty and
responsibility. The said conduct on the . part of Dr.Dahat
amounts to dereliction of duties and hence misconduct.
12. Charge No.l2;- While working as the Principal of Shri

Chakrapati Arts College, Nagpur Dr.Ratnakar Dahat' had
exhibited total carelessness and negligence regarding the welfare
of the students. NSS (National Service Scheme) is one of the
important areas for overall development of the students and the
University takes effective steps for monitoring NSS units of each
of the affiliated colleges. NSS camp in the college is an
opportunity to the students for participation in various social
activities as well as interaction with the students of other
colleges. The management had repeatedly instructed Dr.Dahat
to take initiative for holding NSS camps in college. However in
I
5!
X. •
- 23 -
9
the years 2013-14, 2014-15, 2015-16, 2016-17 Dr. Dahat has
not taken any Initiative for arranging NSS camp. The University I
, provides funds of Rs.43000/- every, year for NSS camps. The

college did not receive the assistance from the University.
Basically the students were put to prejudice and loss. Hence the s
I
apathy shown by Dr.Dahat in protecting the welfare of the
students amounts to carelessness, negligence and dereliction of
duties and responsibilities and hence the misconduct.
NAGPUR
DATED:- President,
Kalyaii Education Society,
ST
Nagpur.
I
j
FRUE
/.i
Arir-iexutg-g
~ -
KALYAN EDUCATION SOCIETY

C/0. “Unmesh”, 103, Tikekar Road,
Dhantoll, Nagpur - 440 012 5
Dr.T.V.Gedam Or. RAMESH L RATNAPARKHI Unmesh Gedam
M.A.LLB.Ph.D. Vice-President * B.A.
President 82, New Indira Colony, . General Secretary
Unmesh, 103,.Tikekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Dhantoti, Nagpur.
Dhantoli, Nagpur *440 012 Nagpur-440 027
Phone No. 2424615 Phone:0712-2745518
Ref No. 7/0/KES/2018-19 Date
•i
To. j'
Dr. Ratnakar Dahat,

Principal,
Shri Chakrapani College of Arts,
Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur.-
s.
ORDER OF SUSPENSION
Whereas as per charge sheet dated 25/09/2017
Departmental Enquiry has been initiated against Dr. Ratnakar
Ramaji Dahat, the Principal of Shri Chakrapani College of
Arts, Hudkeshwar Road, Pawar Nagar, Nagpur. And the .
Proceedings are Underway.
And whereas it is revealed that Dr. Ratnakar Ramaji s
Dahat is misusing his continuation on the post of Principal by

threatening and pressurizing the witnesses as well as by
indulging action so as to harass the witnesses,
«
And whereas continuation of Dr. Ratnakar Ramaji
Dahat, in the office of Principal of the college is found to be
prejudicial
1
to the fair conduct of enquiry and preservation of
documentary evidence because of possibility of its destruction
by him.
- 25 -
J
And whereas ±e Managing Committee of the Society in
the meeting held on 29/05/2018 has considered the issues and
has resolved to place Dr. Ratnakar Ramaji Dahat, under
suspension till the conclusion of Departmental Enquiry.
Hence in terms of this Order Dr. Ratnakar Ramaji Dahat
Principal, Shri Chakrapani College of Arts, Hudkeshwar
Road, Pawar Nagar, Nagpur is placed under suspension from
the date of the receipt of the order till the completion of
departmental enquiry against him. During the period of
suspension he would be entitled for subsistence' allowance
equivalent to 50% of his monthly salary. He would not be
entitled to leave head quarter, without the prior written
perrnission of the management. He is directed to hand over the
charge of the post of the Principal to Dr. Pramod Deyidas Patil
the senior most lecturer in the college as officiating Principal.
•J? (MB “Ccil.A

President
t Kalyan Education Sode^
103, Tltelar Road, Ohaatoll,
Nagpur-U
Copy for information and necessary action.
1. Director, Higher Education, Pune-1 (M.S.)

Joint Director, Higher Education, Nagpur Division,
Nagpur
3. Registrar, Rashtrasant Tukodji Maharaj,
Nagpur University, Nagpur
4. Dr. Pramod Devidas Patil, Asst. Professor,
? Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur
President
Katyan Edacadon Society
103, TlkeUr Road* Ohartoll,
Naiourî .
>^nr>exMyg--(S
X i -26
I^LYAN EDUCATION SOCIETY
CZo. “Unmesh", 103, Tikekar Road,
/ Dr.T.V.Gedam Dhantoii, Nagpur - 440 012
Dr. RAMESH L RATNAPARKHl Unmesh Gedam
M.ALLB.Ph.D. Vice-President • S.A.
President 82, New Indira Colony, General Secretary
Unmesh, 103, Tikekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Dhantoii, Nagpur
Dhantoii, Nagpur-440 012 Nagpur -440 027
Phone No. 2424615 Phone: 0712-27^5518
5ira5far. /9iftnr/,o^6-« f?HT5r: \-g/ei^) ,o<d
A
Hl. H8d?lgRi,
Bwl ftwR, wfr few,
HR^
&W :- d. 7RTOT91F?i HTxii4,dl’ xiftiMiul) Hl^T HFfeRfflcFT, d<i ’ii*i*£'(

HRT fndffH qxwqiJl Mlqi-i*!! juqiMHd.
dqd :- ^) HT 4>iql7Rid HK WT.w/Hrf?nl/ô^^9-u. fenfe? Fndter
dqc^l Mftqiq
?) m 4>Nldqi4 HjI r. ^6VHiftid/ô?6-n, fenra; ^^s/ovô?^
eitld 4fT, 3n^ Tirai4, zri'zft

QF^Pl^ 3n^. 3R3. mJ, xi^ch;f3 4il^<w<T STT^H.
« S’*
*^'Jp Pi^rni %?) 3nifT. Ni«iiqli1 'WiMcfl >(i^«qlitiiol Pi^qn 3TI^.
AC
• iflT qartika 4 3iNUiidi fed pwd urarafan zn^Rrar anfei gsfefer
3ld.
Hiql4 tiPifil wd nd c^RT Pi«q1n 4id Hid- Kf>®<i ^ql^qn
îd -nd. d 3I^ld MiMt4 •Otidn. 3nffe xiqiqiai Pli'JllI 4a-i W ’rd fMwi 1^090 3ld. !
-idtRd illHri) xIRJ <H41dHI HîPtshnqiqi nd Wrd ai«^rd 14il441 ^6916
d3» nd 3nfei ndî ^nd uiujim4imi odt dtufeidi ditiioNui <b<uqwi aid.
îiRr fevidn indd aid 3id ainFm znzd. wd anwr îrdcRmi d=T’d qraftd
dd. w cîRid chwlnqid cW fed Hid. 3id ^qi^rad d hs rHci-nid TORd ^mnwr
mdferi audit, d 5W daR am arnrair wdRi wnt’R? Mlti«i< qw, d fedd.
aiRRlHH
n. *’■. CrrBOan
X v.ii' ’•-"•'•*'
raj:ou*«t.X
w' ,
idS >> •
tHMItdl, W2W. HiRW WH dWT,
wm
ftww
■ ■ HidHifeiteigw. <•!. fz^’’
’*■ k
ipjrhft. ^nn’-»9
true
t X
•• 1
y: ■
.■'1
z KALYAN EDUCATION SOCIETY

CZo. "Unmesh”, 103, Tikekar Road,
Dhantoll, Nagpur - 440 012
Dr.T.V.Gedam Dr. RAMESH L. RATNAPARKHI Unmesh Gedam
M.A.LL.B.Ph.D. Vice-President B.A.
■ President 82. New Indira Colony, General Secretary
Unmesh, 103, Tikekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Ohantoli. Nagpur
Ohantoli, Nagpur *440 012 Nagpur - 440 027
Phone No. 2424615 Phone:0712-2745518
RefNo.72^/KES/2018-19 Datea7/<?/M(?
To,
Dr. Ratnakar Dahat,
(Suspended) Principal,
Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur. •-
Sub :* Withdrawal of Suspension Order.
Ref This office letter No. 710/KES/2018-19; Dt. 11/6/2018

With reference to this office letter No. 710/KES/2018-19,
Dt. 11/6/2018. your suspension from the post of Principal of Chakrapani
College of Arts, Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur, is hereby withdrawn and you are
<5^^ allowed to join the duty as Principal, You are therefore asked to take over
the charge from Dr. Pramod Patil (Officiating Principal) immediately.
Dr. Pramod Devidas Patil, (Officiating Principal), Since the suspension
order of Dr. Dahat is withdrawn you are now advised to hand over the charge
to Dr. Ratnakar Dahat. Principal. of Shri Chakrapani College of Arts,
Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur and report to this office.
President
Katyan Educatloo SodeQ*
103, Tikekar Read, Ohantoli,
Nagpur42
Copy for information and necessary action.
1. Director, Higher Education, Pune-1 (M.S.)

2. Joint Director, Higher Education, Nagpur Division,
3. Registrar, RashtrasantTukodji Maharaj,
. Nagpur University, Nagpur •. . c •
4^ Dr. R. L. Rantaparkhi, Vice President, Kalyan Education Society,
j'’’,r5^‘'’‘Nagpur . c • .
Mr. U. T. Gedam, General Secretary, Kalyan Education Society,
• yy..
Nagpur \ ■„ ,
J
-
i
C/o. “Unmesh", 103. likekar Road.
Dhantoll, Nagpur - 440 012 i
Dr.T.V.Gedam Dr. RAMESH L. RATNAPARKHI . Unmesh Gedam
M.A.LLB.Ph.0. Vice-President B.A.
Unmesh, 103, Ttkekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Dhanloli, Nagpur
Ohantoll, Nagpur-440 012 Nagpur -440 027
y
Phone No. 2424615_____ Phone; 0712-27455
193^
v'
jAlcfaoT
Tifir, ’
fir. ite ^-dilulfdc^

7n^.
NEFT cRSHt
3imuri<l fiPfft cb<u<||d gRnqiH 4A ^rUlui IW’T.'^W Kit ?JT. sprlT
. HglNÎ^'4, tte, Wfr 75^ RScft
cb<U4|ld (ôl<ui tginia WtM
3(.a» ldl^4RT^ W WBF IFSC

CODE
<rtR»{ UhmI • 60004679591 90459.00
wiz. aiiilwiHiR, Hntj^ MAHB0000947
J
oJ 2.1-1 £
(^. g. fe. ’tSTR)
President
prtMH’v TO
Kalyan Edncatfon Sode^
t03, Tlkakar Road* OhiiniBlH
Naspur-U
' nSoC'®^. V*.' ». ’S’*
'*ÛlCS»*' •j
'5
TRUE S-
T>i-
/^/OheXM/e-p
I
-
5

C/o. “Unmesh” 103, Tikekar Road,
Dhantoli, Nagpur-440 012
Or.T.V.Gedam Dr. RAMESH L. RATNAPARKHI Unmesh Gedam
M.A.L.LB.Ph.D.. . . Vice-President B.A.
Unmesh, 103, Tikekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Dhantoli, Nagpur
Dhantoli, Nagpur-440 012 Nagpur-440 027
Phone No. 2424615______________
Phone: 0712-27455
I
. Trf?r,
RT. aidkilMcb,
ft*. R?m^ ife fMi?.
7TTO7.
•“ _NEFT i<l4i*i qanl <t>4UMi8iiqrl.
awTO gnwT W!II?I^ wl, îpw ftm sit s). wnnft
’’5fe5nt; P%>ffr HFTP W4, Wift 3!^ 7g9.n garfT

Srft ^nrfter trM
oT.m 191 •TO

IFSC
CODE
IFWTPW ^3W WF5. •w»
60004679591 90459.00
6I&IC 3ra)wiH'K,
MAHB0000947
(3IHrft ûliT l^Ûlllid inrt’ )
^(1^1
anwHir
■
(^. ft. T^R)

■ «mrw
elo3'’^
^•<041.
'TRUE V
«bki-. 7^
. \
/:J
4
•I
■ -'5D - '
I

Clo. “Unmesh”, 103, Tfkekar Road,
Dhantoli, Nagpur > 440 012
Dr.T.V.Gedam Or. RAMESH L RATNAPARKHI Unmesh Gedam
M.A.L.LB.Ph.D. Vice-President B.A.
Pmfderit 82, New Indira Colony, General Secreta^
Unmesh, 103, Ttkekar Road, Bhagwan Nagar, Dhanlolt, Nagpur
Ohantoli, Nagpur -440 012 Nagpur-440 027 *
Phone No. 2424615 Phone; 0712-27455
ftw : /o^/ r
. uRr, ..
m. ^d^tURch,
wi^ ife ^-arndft^ ftmftw,
W9T.
3INW qitwi gwnr ftm IW SR Rxnw W. WTO TO

§3%>ar ite, HFnp 4«a5T in^, rrw wift siRirar iwr wal
Rraf. iwm Wft?T W>l
ar.M 4ai^4Kr^ •ffcT 74<fcM

lai# IFSC
CODE_______
’irn'HT XiHiwil 3fFI?
60004679591 135688.50 i
€ieic 3i41’W|H*R, HFPp
MAHB0000947
6|2 21<|
3inHTHB
/I J A
6v5 J
-!f>- 43r)
OTTO
w*rr>r ftrtw ihwi
ffStfntfV ;nno7«»9
TRUE
’•
I
J
1
’V *
■ Filed on 07.03.2019
Order reserved on 11.07.2019
Order Pronounced/ : 08.08.201?
issued on
Duration 5 months
0 days
RASHTRASANT TUKADOJI MAHARAJ NAGPUR UNIVERSITY, NAGPUR
BEFORE THE GRIEVANCES COMMITTEE
(Presided over by Shri.Arvind J. Rohee,. Former District ludge)
Grievance Petition No.b2/2019
Dr.Ratnakar S/o Ramaji Dahat,

Plot No.203, Suyog Nagar,
Narendra Nagar Ring Road Grievance
Nagpur Petitionre/Applicant
Versus
Kalyan Education Society, 103,

Tikekar-Road, Dhantoli, Nagpur
Through its President Non-applicant
ORDER
(Delivered on 08.08.2019)
1. The Grievance ■ Petitioner/Applicant approached this
Grievances Committee under Section 79(1) of the Maharashtra Public
Universities Act, 2016 seeking for the following reliefs.

2
• 1. direct the non-applicant to pay the applicant his arrears of
salary for the month of June 2018 to October 2018 along with interest
@12%p.a.;
ii. direct the hon-applicant to pay the applicant full salary
towards subsistence allowance from June 2018 to October 2018, till he
was kept under suspension;
111. direct the non-applicant to fix the salary of the applicant as
per the recommendations of the Pay Commission arid release the
increments and further release the arrears accordingly;
. . iv. Direct the non-applicant to withdraw the charge-sheet and
the show cause notice issued to the applicant;
V. cost of Rs'25,000/- be saddled upon the non-applicant for
the torture and humiliation they have given to the applicant and further
for the mental pressure and physical pain the applicant has gone though;
vi. grant any .other or further relief including costs as may be
deemed'fit in the facts and circumstances of the case and also in the
interest ofjustice.
2. The Applicant is highly qualified being M.A., M.Phil. and
Ph.D. in Marathi and is attached to Shri Chakrapani College of Ails,
Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur run by the Non-applicant Kalyan Education
Society, from 01.01.2008 as Principal. He qualified NET also and is
stated to be a research fellow. The college is affiliated to Rashtrasant
Tukadoji Maharaj Nagpur University, Nagpur and is fully aided by the
State Government.
3. It is stated that till the year 2016-17 the
Applicant had no grievance with the Management. However,

*
thereafter his relations with the President of the Society
v;
-
3
S/ became un-cordial; which finally resulted in filing of. charge-
sheet/Memorandum against him on 25.09.2017 by the Management
thereby initiating a departmental action/disciplinary proceeding against
him. The Applicant contested the enquiry by denying various charges

leveled against him. ■ During pendency of the aforesaid disciplinary
proceeding, the Applicant was put under suspension by the Management
vide order No.710/KES/2018/19 dated 11.06.2018 till completion of
enquiry. However, by another order vide letter No.725/KES/2018-19
dated 27.09.2018 issued by thfe President of the Society and addressed to
the Applicant, the suspension order dated 11.06.2018 is withdrawn with
immediate effect and thus the Applicant resumed the duty as the
Principal of the College, by the end of September 2018.
4. The main grievance of the Applicant is that although he was
put .under suspension for a period of more than three months, initially he
was not paid subsistence allowance i.e. 50% of the salary. However,
thereafter in response .to his requests, 50% of the subsistence allowance
was paid to him for the first month of suspension. It is his grievance that
although suspension order is subsequently withdrawn, he was not paid
the remaining 50% of the subsistence allowance/salary for the period of
suspension from 11.06.2018 to 26.09.2018. It is also his grievance that
. disciplinary action is initiated against him with malafide intention and
ulterior motive to terminate him from service without just cause. He,
therefore, challenged the entire disciplinary proceeding as unwarranted.
illegal and unsustainable. Hence this grievance application.
5. On notice vide reply dated 26.06.2019, the Non-
Applicant denied the claim in toto and stated that > the action
taken by the Management initiating a disciplinary proceeding

S'
4 _ ^4 -
against the Applicant is fully justified and well-founded. The
suspension order is also legal. It is also stated that the enquiry is now
completed and the Enquiry Officer appointed by the Management
submitted his report dated 12.11.2018 after following due procedure.
The copy of Enquiry Report is served on the Applicant seeking his
explanation on the finding of guilt recorded by the Enquiry Officer and
after hearing him the Management had taken a decision to seek
permission of the University regarding, termination of services of the
Applicant on proved charges.
6. It is stated'that full opportunity to defend is given to the
Applicant and necessary procedure is followed by the Disciplinary
Authority as well as the Enquiry Officer, before coming to a conclusion
that the charges are proved and this is a fit case for recommending
termination bf services of the Applicant. It is also stated that after the
present ■ proceeding is filed on 07.03.2019, office orders are already
issued on 13.03.2019 and 14.03.2019 by which the Non-applicant paid
the remaining 50% of the subsistence allowance to the Applicant for the
period of suspension, by crediting the amount in his bank account. As
such nothing is due from the Non-applicant and the Applicant has
deliberately suppressed this fact. It is also stated that so far a§ objection
regarding institution of a disciplinary proceeding and the findings
recorded by the Enquiry Officer and the decision taken by the

'S * •
Management to seek approval of the University for termination of the
■ V
services, it is beyond the jurisdiction of this Grievances Committee to
deal with these issues, since the same can be agitated only before the
Hon’ble. University and College Tribunal, Nagpur, in the event
approval is granted for termination of services and he ' is finally

I
5 -35
7 terminated or any other punishment is imposed. This being so, the
grievance petition is liable to be rejected.
7. The Applicant then submitted a rejoinder on 04.07.2019 in
which he denied all the adverse averments and contentions made in the
reply and reiterated the grounds stated in the petition.
8. Again on 1E07.2019, the Non-applicant filed counter
affidavit to the rejoinder thereby reiterating the pounds stated and the
stand taken in the reply. It is further stated that after completion of the
enquiry proceedings, the Applicant is continued in service from
30,09.2018 on withdrawal of his suspension. It is also made clear that
there is no question of sanctioning annual increment to Applicant, while
making the payment of subsistence allowance. However, after taking
. into account the admissible, increment due to the Applicant from
01.07.2018, the arrears were worked out and further payment of arrears
of-subsistence allowance has been made on 13.03.2019 to the extent to
Rs.90,459/- through NEFT in the bank account of Applicant.and again
Rs.1,35,655.50 on 14.03.2019 in the same fashion. As such nothing is
how due from the Non-applicant. This amount includes the remaining
unpaid 50% of subsistence allowance/salaiy due to Applicant and
increase in salary on release of increment due on 01.07.2018.
9. On 11.08.2019 when the matter was' called out for final
hearing before the Grievances Committee, heard the submissions of the
Applicant and the reply arguments of Dr.T.V. Gedam, the President of

A
the Society.
10. The undersigned and the Hon’ble Members of
■ the Grievances Committee present have carefully gone through

L
{
the entire case record and discussed the issues involved in the matter for
adjudication.
11. On the basis of record, the following points aise for
consideration of the Grievances Committee.
(i). Whether the Applicant is entitled to 50%. of the remaining
subsistence allowance/salary on withdrawal of the suspension order and
also the annual increment due to him on 01.07.2018 and the said amount
is still remains unpaid?
■ (ii) Whether the averments made by the Applicant against the
' pending disciplinary proceedings against him right from the issuance of
charge-sheet, appointment of Enquiry officer, conduct of inquiry-and the
decision taken by the Management to recommend his termination from
service, can be considered by this Grievances Committee?
12. •'The Grievances Committee ■ after giving thoughtful
consideration, answer point No. (i) in the affirmative and point No.(ii) in ,
the negative, for the reasons that follow:-
REASONS
13. So far as the first point for consideration is concerned.
it is the admitted position that the Applicant was served with
charge-sheet/memorandum dated 25.05.2017 initiating a
departmental action against him raising number of charges
alleging misconduct and misappropriation of funds. It is also
not disputed that the Applicant was put under suspension
during pendency of enquiry for the period .from 11.06.2018 to
26.09.2018. The record further shows that initially the-Applicant was
paid 50% of subsistence allowance for the first month of suspension i.e.
June 2018. According to Applicant the 50% of the subsistence allowance

7
for the months of July, August and September and the remaining 50%
subsistence allowance/salary for the month of June after withdrawal of
suspension, including the arrears on account of release of annual
increment due on 01.07.2018, is not paid to him by crediting the account
to Non-applicant and as stated in paragraph No.4 of the counter affidavit
to the rejoinder vide office copies of the letter dated 13.03.2019 (Page .
96) for Rs.90,459/- and 14.03.2.019 (Page 97) for Rs. 1,35,688/- addressed
to the Manager, Maharashtra State Cooperative Bank Ltd., Branch Buldi,
Nagpur the entire unpaid amount of salary/subsistence allowance is paid
to Applicant and nothing due to him. Record further shows that prior to
payment of aforesaid amount of Rs.90,459/- as credited to the
Applicant’s bank account through NEFT vide letter dated 13.08.2018. It
is obvious that the above payment made pertains to 50% of the
subsistence allowance for the period from 11.06.2018 to 26.09.2018. As
stated earlier the remaining balance amount is yet to be paid to the
Applicant and this fact has not been specifically denied by Nori-applicant
in the form of counter reply by giving particulars, except saying that
nothing is now due to Applicant. The Applicant has also not bothered to
give particulars of the above amount paid on three occasions. However,
from record it can safely be said that aforesaid three payments pertain to
50% of subsistence allowance only for the period of suspension.
14. Considering the above factual position .on record,
it can safely be said that the Non-applicant is still liable
to pay remaining 50% of the subsistence allowance, for
the period of suspension and also the arrears on release
of annual increment to applicant on 01.07.2018 to 26..09.2018.

/
8 — -
15. We, therefore, do not find any force in the contention of the
Non-applicant that Applicant is not entitled to balance amount of 50% of
subsistence allowance. on withdrawal of suspension, although the
departmental action initiated against the Applicant is not finally
concluded awaiting approval of University to the recommendations of
Management for termination of services of the applicant. It will take it
own time, since it is at final stage. Further, it was transpired during the
course of hearing that the Applicant himself in his capacity as the
• Principal of the College is Drawing and Disbursing Officer (DDO). This
being so*he himself must have approved and sanctioned the payments
stated in the preceding para to himself. As such the Non-applicant
cannot not no turn back to say that no amount is due to Applicant as
claimed by him. In such circumstances of the case, the Grievances
Committee Ijas no option but to answer point No.l in the affirmative.
16. So far as point No.2 is concerned, it is needless to say that
the Managing Committee of the. Society is empowered to initiate
disciplinary action against the teaching and non-teaching staff of the
college run by it being the appointing authority. As such the
Memorandum/Charge-sheet filed by the President of the Society raising
as many as 12 charges against the Applicant including that of
misappropriation of college fund, commission of numbers of financial
irregularities by using his position as the Principal and other act of
misconduct and such prima-facie charge sheet is filed by the competent
Authority. It appears from record that the NonrApplicant
followed the prescribed procedure for initiation of disciplinary
action and conduct of the enquiry against the Applicant thereafler and
finally the Management reached conclusion to recommend termination

* ■ ’ 5
9
of Applicant from service to the University. The said proposal is still
pending consideration, since decision of University on recommendations
made is reported to be still awaited. Consequently the Applicant
continued in service till orders are passed by the Management regarding
the proved charges, based on the directions to be issued by the University
in this behalf.
17.- Further so far as the provisions of Section 81 (1) (a) of the
Maharashtra Public Universities Act, 2016 is concerned, the jurisdiction
lies with the Hon’ble University and College Tribunal to deal with
grievances against dismissal/termination/cessation of service by the
University or the Management or compulsory retirement or reversion to
lower post. Obviously Grievances Committee has no jurisdiction over
such matters. This being the position, it will be beyond the scope and
competence pf the Grievances. Committee to make further comments on

• >
the grounds raised by the Applicant against the enquiry proceedings and
to record any finding on it. The Applicant will have full opportunity to
challenge the office order, to be issued by. the Managing Committee,
based on approval of the University in the pending enquiry proceedings
against him. As such it will be open for the Applicant to raise all the
grounds against initiation, conduct and final disposal of the enquiry
proceeding, raised by him in this grievance application regarding
disciplinary action taken against him before the aforesaid Forum. The
Grievances Committee, therefore, accepts the contention of the Noii-
applicant that so far as this aspect of the case is concerned, the
Grievances Committee has no jurisdiction to entertain and
adjudicate upon it. 18. From the above discussion, it |s obvious
that the Applicant is entitled to partial relief. Before concluding it may

■
10 AO —
J. ■ • be- stated that it was revealed by the Grievances Committee that the
relations between the Management/Principal and the Applicant are
severely strained or became acutely un-cordial as transpired during the
course of hearing, making allegations and counter-allegations by them
against each other, in any case, the Applicant is not entitled to full relief
from this Grievances Committee.
19. So far as claim for grant of interest on the arrears of 50%
unpaid subsistence allowance is concerned, it cannot be granted for the
reason that the Applicant will be receiving full salaiy for suspension
period, without rendering any service to college and the disciplinary
action is. yet to be culminated.
20. (a) The Grievance Petition is, therefore, partly allowed.
(b) The Non-applicant is directed to settle and pay the balance
amount of salary to the applicant for the period of suspension and
■ also arrears on account of release of annual increment for the
period from 01.07.2018 to 26.09.2018 and it be credited to
Applicant’s Bank Account, within two months from today and
submit the compliance report to the Grievance Committee, failing
which Applicant will be at liberty to approach appropriate
forum/authority for necessary action against Non-applicant.
(c) The clam for grant of interest on balance amount to be paid
is, however, is rejected.
«) The parties are directed to bear their respective costs of this
proceedings.
(e) The office is directed to forward authentic copy
of this Order, (which is authored by the undersigned in
■i
i
— -
11
■ consultation with the Hon’ble Members of the Grievances
Committee present), to both the Parties at the earliest for taking
appropriate steps in the matter.
Sd/-
(Arvind J. Rohee)
Chairman,
Nagpur Grievances Committee
s'" August, 2019 Rashtrasant Tukadoji Maharaj
Nagpur University,Nagpur.
t) tfXti Tfe - 37
-
snr^Ni iftvi it'Slffi'H

i
R
•J
. H^lfqeilW<4
■ • M^Kiui wrn^ (ûii8a (IH!I
'(qk*<0(,-p^?9t - Wo oW I ■ .1 -
V
MtaAs .* wwwtfttknpBAtaile0«em / fr«nan: ceiunMgwi9gimn««n
* • * «*»«■•••■•
/I
. ■ vrt4 ttsMsB .
■gf. -(Hlehl 'snsns
X*!. 4b., 4{>i. 4.
J.. ; i
„c.7.)te./.o
3rf?r. 5
Hl.
ftm-ftHK HTH^ ftHFT,
HPPjy. U Ji
5
ftHH-:— Acim’I .(PlooicDci 4o'll4i
:- H51W. WH^ ftsmfte, tRFR ftHRor

i.
-. ■ • ■'j ' i
311^
• an^ (Grievance Petition No.02/2019) ft. 08.082019. .j '.
►
. 'HT^ 2018 ^1 2018 Hl Wiratftcl HHT Mix4t<jMîq'e»i ftd41d ■

cf>^ WH ftdelH "
H'hcîyci vign hhh/;; ftsipftaiw
6R)'l0t'(<r> 3lft. SpRni
RaNui aT<bgii4S1 'ûai^
2018 cl 'd'^qx 2018 Hl ^dsnTlel ctclHIth Ulchfifldi)
j
'■
vgiPH 685947/- (3181^— W cOT Wnft W?
lift, it Hfl ftft.ft

)
■J
II
1 .i
Wl?l
1. vrgn hth^ arft^n^ft nn-
ri
’^Printipa! '
. 2. aiwgil cTOf^TcH SMtMipiisKalaMa^nifrilar^ ■ ■I1'
Huffieav3fRoa!l.Mi$iir'34
3. ^cqpi ftm ft^ tl=l
oti?
LiI <
•i’’
Pmepti
" I
„„.... .. . . .....
SMChitepifliKiiallasnl]^
KuMnRo31ll>^*34
i j
■ -4&• •'• •
t
’ ,-;35
-. ?r £;~ l«
■BHa
•I
^/in^Xtire-
J ----------- ----------------
-^3
8JlJlii5il®Il
sus'iswjraw (swlSiSHw), ftainOT,
cmMiisi cjMdlaai §<stiiJiit:cii, ISiliciiii^^, 6itii<t)'jjiijt^ yyo oo«i
Website:www.i(lnagnur.in . _______ Email: idhengp@rediffmail.coni
Phone No.Ojn- 2361713________________________ Fax No.0712- 2554210
tii.4RHI<i/dn'iM«ict,/f4>i^/,o^^ f^r<b-
oi.pi Iicie..
,■
/vnwT. *** *
\/ sft. ■sRfi’Wt iffilfci^JiWT, <Zlr
n?.=ini7-Kvoo3x
*.cX
. chlcdidlci STttiqiRil PlQOu<iIqqq|,
:- anMR .trasF.^ft tr.^.Tr.HT/'3^‘A<:/?‘?-?o f^.\9.?o.ô^^
sfrTW 5bcaftuA(id gS, mfimrl % too ardrUH f^rra:?

.i
c!ir?wft iMs ■‘THT 311^. c^n^ TT.iJ.’?. HFFJT f^lMldMI rTsPR pHdRUI ^HNI
■3ii^ Itw dx.?t>?x apgn 3nqc^ Pth^zt wiOTlfii?r -^0^6 afrazhr-ôu
'<At wnl TTgfijH -ifTpia WgrT ip TO tHl'U^ld 371^.
(^.î'ilcfi))
TO7R 37fWTl
.u
"I J
V
:-T. wPi.HFi^ feapfe, wjr ''l1 I»

'<.3raiw.îni wH. HFUJT
■^1
PAtcipal
SlfliM^MMslianW
KaftEst!HaiR(iad,H33pu[*34
' i
I
■I I
fl 1
. .h
I
I
......... . .C: Mi
r
/InhecUT^^-r
wn?^n^
(3^ lîgq) fWn,
’fftk WcT, RiaN^, HFI^-Wooo^.
|seh^q< HPPJ5 —Y'iSoo^x.
^looialco lHo6uq|fitl«ta.
3TFI^ ^0 f^. 'a/ô/ô^^
3nwn ^fqu<îd aSt, R^4dl 3nf^4}|<| t ^fw

^1^1'=!’^' ftnfe naTTT 3RH 3TTt. TT.g.n. nppjj
fttllM^6lxx^| VW ftWT nlHdl'=H 3TI^ 6/6/3T^ 3Tin^
=hiQ>iq^lalc^ ml ^0^6 I 3iT=('<ilc« ^0^6 wtl41 Hnpft îafw
^rr^ amt. nr nina gcs tna? to ta sni.
W-
(^. Îf^)
VWR 3Tfwtt,
Miiqfooq, 3^ fvIOT,
HPPJJ f^qPT, HPT^
mRiIqomI —
0 nr. (ai^îitnirHch îpRft), wrt, nrpjj fnnnfte,

W-
qicîui fvT^RT 3;:4z(, fJ45cb< Hmyjj
Ce’pvi
- 4^ -
s
wp6274.15.odt

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
iTiin.[* PETITION NO.6274y2015

PETITIONERS ; 1. Kohali Rural Education Society,
dirough its Secretaty, Kohali, Tahsil
Kalmeshwar, Distrid Nagpur. ■
2. Knshnarao Wankhede Vidyalaya, •

through its Head Master, Kohali, Tahsil
Kalmeshwar, District Nagpur.
• ••
...VERSUS..; ■
RESPONDENT.S • 1. The State of Maharashtra,' through its
Secretary, Department of School Education,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. ‘.
2. The Education officer (Secondary),

Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.
3. Shri Ramdas fejram Bhoyar,

(Dead) through L.Rs., .
3-a) Smt. Suman Ramdas Bhoyar

aged major, Occu - household
3-b) Shri. Avinash Ramdas Bhoyar,
aged major, Occu - Private.
3-c) Shri Laxmikant Ramdas Bhoyar,

aged major, Occu - Private.
All (3 -a) to (3-c) r/o Kohali,

Tai. Kalmeshwar; Dist. Nagpur. '
Shri B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for petitioners

Shri I.J. Damie, AGP for respondent nps.l and 2
Shri R.J. Mirza, Advocate for respondent nos.3-a to 3-c
::: Uploaded on -29109/201$

Downloaded on - 01/01/202010dl9:09
5 - A5 -
%
§
s W;
^6274.15.odt
2
•<
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, AND

KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
PATE •: 24.08.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith; The petition is heard
finally at the stage of admission with ffie consent of. the learned Counsel
for the parties.

By this writ petition, the petitioner - Management seeks a
direction against the respondent no.2 — Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Nagpur to release the difference of 'salary payable to the
respondent no.3 for the period from 5.10.2006 to 28.3.2007 and the
entire salary from 28.3.2007 to 31.8.2008 within .a time frame. The
petitioners have challenged the order of the Education Officer, dated
25.8.2015 rejecting the prayer of the petitioners for .sanctioning and
releasing the salary in favour of the respondent nq.3, as stated herein

I
above.
Few facts giving rise to the petition are stated thus ; -
The respondent no.3 was appointed as. an Assistant Teacher
in the petitioner no.2 - School run'by the petitioner no.l - Management
in the year 1971. The petitioner no.2 receives grarit-in-aid from the State
Government. The respondent no.3 was ’promoted to the post of
Uploaded on ‘29/08/2018 -'Down/oadetfon ‘01/01/202018:09:09 :::

x*SStf« ■'^'^
%
s
<?
H
wp6274.15.odt
Headmaster on 1.7.2003. By an order, dated 5.10.2006. ±e respondent
no.3 was placed under suspension and by an order.dated 28.3.2007 his
services were terminated.. The respondent rto.3 attained the age of
superannuation on 31.8.2008. An appeal was fded by *e respondent no.3
against the order of his termination, dated 28.3.2007 before the School
. ■ Tribunal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools
5
(Conditions of Service) Regulation Act. The said appeal was dismissed by
the school Tribunal, by the judgment, dated 18.9.2013. The respondent
no.3 filed Writ Petition No.7266/2014 challenging the judgment of the
School Tribunal. The writ petition was aUowed and this Court, had. by the
judgment, dated 17.4.2015 set aside the order -of termination of the
respondent no.3 and directed the Management to pay the arrears of salary
r .
to the respondent no.3. The Court,- however, kept open, the issue m
respect of the reimbursement of the said amount by. the petitioners from
the State exchequer.' In pursuance of the said judgment, the petitioners
have paid an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- to. the respondent no.3. However,
an amount of Rs.2,21,192/- is liable to be paid ih terms of the judgment
in the writ petition. The. petitioners had requested, the respondent no.2 -
Education Officer for sanctioning and releasing the amount of difference
of salary and the regular salary, as stated hereih above but the prayer of
the petitioners was rejected by the impugned communication. The
::: Downloaded on • 01/01/202018:09:09

::: Uploodeilon •29/08/2019
- 47-
/■ < ■“
%■
wp6274.15.odt
petitioners' have challenged the said conununication and have sought a
direction against the respondent nos.l and 2 to sanction* and release the
salary as aforesaid in favour of the respondent no.3, at the earliest.
Shri Kulkami, the- learned Counsel for the -petitioners
submitted that though this Court had allowed the writ petition filed by the
respondent no.3 and had directed the petitioners to release the salary in
his favour, the issue in regard to the reimbursement of the said salary
from the State exchequer was kept open. It is submitted that during the
period when the respondent no.3 was.out of service, the Management had
not employed any other employee and the State has not paid the salary to
some other employee for the post of Headmaster. It' is stated that in this
background, specially when the salary is not paid to any other employee
for the period during which the respondent no.3 was out of service, a
direction to the Education Officer to release the salary in favour of the
respondent no.3 would be necessary. The. learned Counsel relied on the
judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, reported in 2016 (2) ALL MR
947 (S.C.) to substantiate his submission^that normally it would be the
responsibility of the State Government to bear the burden of payment of
salary in respect of the employee of a grant-in-aid school. It is stated that
though in the peculiar facts of that case, the claim of the Management for
reimbursement was rejected, in the circumstances of the present case, a
Uploaded on •29/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on -01/01/202018:09:09 :::

-AS -
/
<?
wp6274.15.odt
direction could be issued to the Education Officer for releasing the salary.
I
It is stated that an amount of Rs.3,00,000/- could be released in favour of
the petitioners as the said amount is already paid by the petitioners to the
respondent no.3 and the remaining amount could be released in favour of
the legal heirs of the respondent no.3, as the respondent no.3 has expired.
Shri Damle, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent nos.l and 2 has denied the claim of the
petitioners. It is stated that in the writ petition filed by the respondent
no.3, this Court had directed the Management to. pay the salary to the
respondent no.3. It is stated that the Management was at fault in
terminating the services of the- respondent no.3 and therefore, the State
exchequer cannot be burdened for paying the salary of the respondent
no.3. It is stated that in the judgment,-reported in 2016 (2) ALL MR 947
(S.C.) and relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the facts
were distinguishable and as of a rule the liability cannot be fastened on
the State exchequer to pay the salary of a terminated employee of a
grant-in-aid school.
Shri Mirza, the learned. Counsel for the respondent nos.3-a
to 3-c submitted that the respondent ho.3 would be entitled to the arrears
of salary and it does not matter to the respondent no.3 whether it comes
from the petitioners or from the State exchequer. The learned Counsel,
::: Uploaded on • 29/08/2016 Down/oatfetfon - 01/01/202018:09:09 :::

3
I a %
wp6274.15.odt
however, stated that in view of the judgment cited by the Counsel for the
petitioners, primarily it would be the liability of the State Government to
pay the salary in respect of a terminated employee of a grant-in-aid
school, if the State Government* has. not paid the-salary to .some other
employee, who is appointed in the place of the.terminated employee.

On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that
it would be necessary to.direct the respondent nos.l and 2, in the '
circumstances of the case, to release the salary in favour of the respondent
no.3. In the case before the Hon'ble Supreme Court; the liability to pay the
salary was specifically fastened on- the Management and the State
Government was discharged of its liability to pay the salary. Such is not
the case here. In the case before 'the Hon’ble Supreme Court, the
Management had sought the salary-by filing a petition and the said
petition was withdrawn before a second petition for the same relief was
w
• • I*
filed. Though in the peculiar facts before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, the
Hon'ble Supreme Court had held that the Management would be liable to
pay the salary and the State Government would not be liable to reimburse
it to the Management, the Hon'ble’ Supreme Court has observed that
generally it would be for the State Government to release the salary to a
discharged employee of a grant-in-aid school. In'the. instant case, though
this Court had directed the Management to pay the salary to the
:;: Uploatlodon -29/08/2016 .::: Downloaded on - 01/01/202018:09:09 :::

— 5V -
%
a
\ ■
I ; % •
, - wp6274.15.odt
i.
respondent no.3, this Court had kept the issue in regard to the
reimbursement of the salary by the petitioners from the State exchequer,
open. The issue in regard to the payment of salary by the Management
was not foreclosed by the judgmeiit in the writ petition. It is rightly
submitted on behalf of the petitioners that since the petitioners had not
employed any other employee in the place of the respondent no.3 as the
Headmaster and had not secured the salary for such other employee, it
would be necessary for the respondent nos.l and 2 to pay the salary of
one employee i.e. the respondent no.3 in this case. The post on which the
respondent no.3 was appointed was a sanctioned post and his promotion
was approved. If that is so, the respondent no.2 could not have declined
to reimburse the salary to the petitioners. In the facts of this case, we are
of the view that it would be necessary for-the respondent nos.l and 2 to
pay the salary to the respondent no.3.
Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is allowed.
The impugned order is quashed and set-aside. We hereby direct the
respondent nos.l and 2 to release the difference of salary to the
respondent no.3-a for the period from 5:10.2006. to 28.3.2007 and the
entire salary for the period from 28.3.2007 to 31.8.2008 within a period
of -two months. Since the petitioners have already paid , a sum of
Rs.3,00,000/- to the respondent no.3, in pursuance of the judgment in the
;;; Uptooctetfon -2a/0aZ20f6 Downloadot/on • 01/01/2020 ia:09di9 :::

- 51 -
/ ^•4
I a %
wp6274.I5.odt
• 8.
writ petition, the respondent nos.l and 2 should release an amount of
Rs.3,00,000/- in favour of the petitioners and an amount of Rs.2,21,192/-
in favour of the respondent no.3-a, within a period of two months.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
True
Vi'"
::: Uploadedon -29/08/2016 ■ Down/oattedon • 01/01/202018:09:09 :::

12.WP 650_2020

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

12.WP 650_2020

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Blank Page for Writing Notes

Blank Page for Writing Notes

Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur through its

State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Deptt. Of .....Respondents.

copy served to GP for R.No. 1 & 1

Appeal W.P.NO. /2020

(Advocate Shri ■ B. G. Kulkarni & S. N. Shend*e

UNDER ARTICLES 226 OF

Caveat not file<

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Corani, - >

Order entered in the Register on

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

WRIT PETITION NO.650 OF 2020

Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram,

Mr.,6.G. Kulkami, Advocate for the petitioner,

CORAM: Nl'ITN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J, MANTRI. JJ.

Office objections are to be removed within

2. In case, if the office objections are removed,

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) SAMBRE, J.)

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

m THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

- Oflic Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,

GPN—J-1945—R(A|HCBN—04-2022—50.000 (Loose) —ALA4*. * • • i »’

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

Shri. B.G. Kulkarni, Adv. for Petitioner

WRIT PETITION NO. 650 OF 2020

Kalyan Education Society,nagpur Through ....PETITIONER

BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNI for Petitioner

CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL )

WRIT PETITION NO. 650 OF 2020

Kalyan Education Society,nagpiir Through ....PETITIONER

BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNl for Petitioner

CORAM ; HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL)

WRIT PETITION NO. 650 OF 2020

Kalyan Education Society,nagpur Through ....PETITIONER

BHANUDAS GOPALDAS KULKARNI for Petitioner

CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE NITIN W. SAMBRE

( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL )

•jLrij»/**~*«Aj>.^r.*j‘ *-iTLf-rLin ttr -_*■ *—u*Lf^ ** * * *• -

•I'' (?yTAt?g yr^g>'g

. Vx. '’’•^ -••‘jcClAlO

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR-

Writ Petition No. /2020

PETITIONER Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur

The copy of letter issued by

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY.

NAGPUR BENCH. NAGPUR.

Writ Petition No. /2020

PETITIONER Kalyan Education Society, Nagpur

SYNOPSIS/ DATES AND EVENTS

Sr. Date Particulars

including Shri ChakrapanI Arts College,

Nagpur which is 100% grant in aid college

affiliated to R.T.M. , Nagpur University,

2. 01.01.2008 Respondent No.2 was appointed as the

Principal of the College and the said

appointment was approved by the University.

3. 25.09.2017 In view of various commissions and

omissions on the part of respondent No.3

including financial irregularities and mis-

appropriation of college amount of

GPN—J-1945—R(A|HCBN—04-2022—50.000 (Loose) —ALA4. • • i »’

•jLrij»/**~«Aj>.^r.j‘ -iTLf-rLin ttr -_■ —uLf^ ** * * *• -