1

IN THE COURT OF HON’BLE PRESIDING OFFICER SCHOOL

TRIBUNAL, PUNE REGION, PUNE, AT PUNE

APPEAL NO. /2021

Miss. Deepali Vinayak Karnik

@ Mrs. Sai Sagar Bahulikar
Age; __ Years, Occ; Nil at Present,
R/at; Prathamesh Moreshwar Saraswati, APPELLANT
A-102,
Datar Ali,
Pen,
District- Raigad.

Vs.

1. Pen Education Society

C/o., Private High School,
Pen,
District – Raigad – 402 107.
(Through It’s Secretary)

2. Private High School & Jr. College,

Pen,
District – Raigad – 402 107.
(Through It’s Principal)

3. The Education Officer, RESPONDENTS

(Secondary Section)
Zilla Parishad, Raigad,
At Alibaug.
District – Raigad.

APPEAL UNDER SECTION 9(1) OF THE MAHARASHTRA

EMPLOYEES OF PRIVATE SCHOOLS (CONDITIONS OF
SERVICES) REGULATION ACT, 1977 AND THE RULES
THEREUNDER

The Appellant above named most respectfully begs to

submit as under:

1. The Appellant is qualified as B.Sc. (Chemistry) M.Sc.

(Chemistry) & B.Ed.(Chemistry & Maths) she belongs to open
Category.
 2

2. The Respondent No.1 herein is a Society Registered under the

Societies Registration Act, 1860 and also under the Bombay
Public Trust Act, 1950.

3. The said Institution runs and manages

A
4 Secondary Schools

a) Private High School & Jr. College, Pen, District Raigad

having classes from 5th to 12th standards,

b) Ma. Na Kanya Vidyalaya, (Girls High School), Pen,

District Raigad, having classes from 6th to 10th standards,

c) ______ Godase Vidyalaya, Varsai, Taluka Pen, District

Raigad having classes from 8th to 10th standards,

d) Jai Kisan Vidya Mandir & Jr. College, Wadkhal, Tal. Pen,
District Raigad having classes from 8th to 12th standards.

All the aforesaid Schools as well as Jr. College are not

Recognised but also receives 100% Grant-in-Aid.

One Sr. College under the name and style _________ at

Pen District Raigad. The said Sr. College is Recognised by the
State & Affiliated by the Mumbai University and also receives
100% Grant-in-Aid.
C
a) One Marathi Medium Private School ________
Recognised by the State & and also receives 100% Grant-
in-Aid &
b) One Marathi Medium (Primary) Private School ________
Recognised by the State & and also receives 100% Grant-
in-Aid.

a) One English medium Un-Aided Primary School.

4. The Appellant submits that, prior to joining the services of the

Respondent No.1, the Appellant has worked in Anand Shala at
 3

Pen for the period from __________. The said School is an

English Medium School but the same is Unaided School.
5. The Respondent No.1 had published an Advertisement inviting
Applications for various Posts including 2 Posts of Trained
Science Graduate Teacher some time in 2012, in Daile Local
News Paper. In response, Appellant had applied for the Post of
a Science Graduate Teacher. She was interviewed alongwith
other Candidates & she was Selected for the Post of a Science
Graduate Teacher. The Appellant however was told that, she
was being kept on waiting list.

6. The Appellant submits that, as mentioned hereinabove the

English Medium School were the Appellant was working was
Un-Aided School where the Appellant was getting an opportunity
of being Appointed in a 100% Aided School. The Appellant
therefore had Resigned her Employment from Anand Shala
English Medium School. In due course one Mr. Malwar Mangal
Balaram (B.Sc, B.Ed) who was working as Head Master of P.N.
GOdase Vidya Mandir, Varsai retired on & from 31/10/2014 on
attaining the age of Superannuation.
7. The Appellant thereafter came to be issued with an Appointment
Order dated 06/09/2014, Appointing the Appellant as a Full Time
Shikshan Sevak for the period of 3 years from 06/09/2014 to
05/09/2017.
8. The said Appointment of the Appellant was in prescribed Form.
The Appointment of the Appellant was on clear & permanent
vacancy. The said Appoitment was on Honorarium of Rs.8,000/-
p.m. as per the rate prescribed by the State. The Appellant was
called upon to execute an Undertaking (Hamipatra) in prescribed
Form. The same was addressed to the Head Master & Ex-
officio Secretary of the School Committee. The Appellant was
also requird to submit a Joining Report stating that, she was
Joining the services on & from 06/09/2014 at 11.00a.m. The
said Joining Report was endorsed by the Head of the Private
 4

School & Jr. College, Pen i.e. the Respondent No.2, certifying
that, the Appellant had joined the services & taken up charge of
the Post to which she was Appointed.
9. The Appellant submits that, the Appellant had full & sufficient
workload in Private High School & Jr. College, Pen. The
Appellant was entrusted with the responsibility of teaching
Science & Maths subjects to the different Classes, this
responsibility was successfully shouldered by the Appellant.
The Head of ‘Private School & Jr. College, Pen, District Raigad
had submitted a Proposal dated 09/09/2014 to the Education
Officer (Secondary) Raigad, Zilla Parishad, Alibaug District
Raigad for Approval to the Appointment of the Appellant. In his
covering letter dated 09/09/2014 it was mentioned by the
concern Headmaster that, the Proposal was submitted in the
prescribed Form with all the necessary annextures. It was
specifically requested that, Approval in the individual name of
the Appellant may kindly be granted. The Appellant was orally
told that, till Approval in her favour was received she should
signed on separate Attendance Sheet which is treated as a Staff
Muster. The Appellant in good faith signed the Staff Muster &
continued to discharge her Workload.
10. The Appellant submits that, the Approval of the Appellant was
awaited since some time around that time all over the State of
Maharashtra there were some issues raised by the Teachers
regarding they having being declared as Surplus. In the
meantime the Respondent No.1, Institution had asked the
Appellant to work in all its aforesaid different Schools without
issuing any order to that effect. The Appellant had no other go
but to do the same.
11. The Workload discharged by the Appellant all the time was of
Science & Maths subjects to the higher classes. The Appellant
is not aware as to what transpired behind her back between
Respondent No.1 it’s 4 Schools on one hand and the Authorities
of the Department of Education on the other hand. The
 5

Appellant understands that, some the employees of the

Respondent No.2 were even required to go to High Court. Since
the Services of the Appellant were continued & the Appellant
was assured that, she would get her Approval in due course.
12. The Appellant submits that, in good faith the Appellant was
continued to work and last Services rendered by the Appellant
were from 01/12/2016 till 01/05/2018 at Jai Kisan Vidyamandir,
Vadkhal.
13. The Appellant thereafter has not been allowed to discharge her
workload & the Services of the Appellant came to be Terminated
from _______ The period thereafter is being explained by the
Appellant in her Application for Delay Condonation.

14. The Appellant, therefore, feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with

Oral otherwise Termination of her Services by the Respondent
No.1 & 2 begs to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal by way of
present Appeal on the following amongst other Grounds which
are set out hereinbelow without prejudice to each others.

GROUNDS

A. That the impugned action of the Respondent No.1

Terminating the Services of the Appellant by way of otherwise
termination is illegal, improper and misconceived.
B. There was no genuine reasons for the Respondent Nos.
1 & 2 to terminate the Services of the Appellant.
C. The Appellant has not been issued with any Order of
Termination in writing.
D. The Appellant has not been assigned any reason for
terminating her Services.
E. The Appointment of the Appellant was on a clear and
permanent Post made after following the due Procedure of
Selections.
 6

F. The Appellant was Appointed as a ‘Full Time Sikshan

Sevak’ for the period of 3 years and as mentioned
hereinabove even proposal dated _______ in respect of the
Appellant was submitted to the Authorities of the
Department of Education. The Appellant during the period
of her employment has discharged work load as a ‘Full
Time Teacher’. On completion of the period of Shikshan
Sevak of 3 years, the Appellant has become a Permanent
Employee of the Respondent No. 1.
G. The Appellant is not aware as to what has transpired
between the Respondent No.1 & its Schools on one hand
and the Authorities of the Department of Education on the
other hand, The Appellant was not a party to the same.
H. The Appellant has not been communicated either by the
Respondents at any point of time the Approval in respect of
the Appellant has been rejected by the Respondent No.3.
The Appellant submits that, the School being 100% Aided,
the Appellant was asked to wait for her salary till Grant-in-
Aid is released by the State. At times the Appellant had
requested for some payment since she was required to
spend for travelling while she was entrusted with
responsibility of discharging work load in …… School at
Vadkhal and …. School at Varsai. Moreover even otherwise
the Appellant was facing financial problems. The Appellant
was, therefore, paid some amounts by the Respondent
Nos. 1 & 2 and the Appellant was told that the said amounts
will be treated as advance against Salary of the Appellant
and either the same will be deducted from the salary of the
Appellant while the Appellant is being paid Arrears of Salary
or alternately if, the Salary of the Appellant is credited into
her Bank Account directly by the Authorities of the Dept. of
Education, the Appellant will have to refund the same.
 7

There was no reason for the Appellant to have any

objections for the same.
I. The Appellant submits that the performance of the
Appellant was satisfactory during the period of her
employment. The results of the subjects taught by the
Appellant were excellent.
J. The Appellant was also deputed for Short Term
Refreshes Courses conducted by the Dept. of Education in
her capacity as a Employee of the Respondent No.1. The
Appellant at times also has worked as a Supervisor for the
Board Examination.
K. The Appellant was also entrusted with Responsibilities
as a Class Teacher of VIIth-A Class in Jai Kisan Vidyalaya,
Vadkhal and also Class in M.N. Kanya Vidyalaya.
L. The Appellant submits that, in response to her request a
Certificate of Experience came to be issued by the
Headmaster of Jai Kisan Vidya Mandir, Vadkhal, Taluka
Pen, District Raigad. However, the concerned Headmaster
has committed grave error therein to probably said that his
own interest and also for the interest of the institution. In
the background of other facts and circumstance mentioned
by the Appellant hereinabove, the status of Full Time
Shikshan Sevak once conferred upon the Appellant could
not and cannot be changed.
M. The Respondents have violated the Provisions of Law as well
as the Principles of natural Justice.

N. Throughout her employment with the Respondent No.1 the

Appellant was never issued a single Memo or warning letter.
There were no adverse remarks communicated to the Appellant
at any time. The performance of the Appellant was satisfactory.
 8

The same was also appreciated by the Respondent

Management.

O. The Appellant being a Permanent Employee of the

Respondent No.1 Institution, the Services of the Appellant could
have been Terminated by the Respondent No.1 only if the
Appellant was found guilty of some serious charges of
Misconduct and/or misbehaviour and only after holding Enquiry
by a duly Constituted Enquiry Committee after giving opportunity
to the Appellant to defend herself.

P. The impugned action of the Respondent No.1, Institution of

Terminating the Services of the Appellant is unfair, arbitrary,
discriminatory and malafide.
Q. The impugned action of the Respondent No.1 of terminating
the Services of the Appellant is otherwise illegal, Improper and
contrary to the well settled Principles of Natural Justice, equity,
and good Conscious.

The Appellant craves leave of this Hon'ble Tribunal to

add/alter/ amend/ and / or to delete any of the aforesaid
grounds.

15. There being no Written Order of Termination issued by the

Respondent No.1 to the Appellant, the point / question of the
Limitation in the present Appeal in view of the relevant
provisions of the M.E.P.S. Act, 1977 does not arise. However, by
way of abundant precautions, the Appellant is filing an
Application for Delay Condonation Separately.

16. The Appellant is paying the prescribed Fees of Rs. 500/- by way
of a Demand Draft No. _____________ dated 28/10/2021 drawn
on State Bank of India, Main Branch, Pune.
 9

17. The Appellant submits that School where the Appellant was
working is situated in Raigad District. Hence this Hon'ble
Tribunal has Jurisdiction to try and entertain the present Appeal.

18. The Appellant, therefore, prays that,

a) This Appeal may kindly be allowed.

b) This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare the impugned

action of the Respondent No.1, terminating the Services of
the Appellant by way of otherwise Termination as illegal,
improper and this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to quash
and set aside the same.

c) The Respondent No.1, be directed to reinstate the

Appellant in Service.

d) The Respondent No.1 be directed to pay to the Appellant

her Back Wages from the date of Termination of her
Services till the date of his Reinstatement.

e) The Appellant be awarded the Costs of this Appeal, and

this Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly pass such other orders as
may be deemed fit and necessary in the interest of
Justice.

PLACE: APPELLANT

DATE: 29 /10/2021

ADV FOR THE APPELLANT

VERIFICATION

I, ________________, Age; ___ Years, Occ. Nil R/at;

_______________________. the present Appellant, does hereby
 10

state on Solemn Affirmation & declare that, the contents of the Memo
of the Appeal hereinabove are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge and belief.
Solemnly Affirmed at Pune, on 29 day of October, 2021.

APPELLANT

Some time recently the Termination of the Services of the Appellant by

way of Oral order of Termination, in response to the Application of the
Appellant to give her Termination order in writing, surprisingly, the
Appellant was given one order of Termination dated 12/12/2014. This
document was seen by the Appellant for the first time, when it was
received by her some time in the year 2020. Alongwith the said
Termination order the Appellant was also supplied with the copy of
another document, wherein it was mentioned that, said termination
order dated 12/12/2014 was cancelled w.e.f. 10/01/2015. Moreover
the said order was not even served upon the Appellant at the relevant
time nor it was even shown to the Appellant. The said order was not
implemented because the Appellant was worked there after. Therefore
the said order dated 12/12/2014 had/has become infructuous hence
question of challenging the same does not arise at all.