Contempt Petn. Nos. 179 and 180 of 1993. Case: Tukaram s/o Khanduji Gaikwad Vs Santosh Mahadeorao Sayam. High Court of Bombay (India)

Case NumberContempt Petn. Nos. 179 and 180 of 1993
CounselFor Petitioner: A. P. Deshpande, Advs. and For Respondents: R. S. Kale, (for Nos. 1 and 2) and Shri Badar, A. G. P. (for Nos. 3 and 4), Advs.
JudgesB. U. Wahane, J.
IssueContempt of Courts Act (70 of 1971) - Sections 2(b), 12
Citation1995 CriLJ 577
Judgement DateJanuary 06, 1994
CourtHigh Court of Bombay (India)

Judgment:

  1. The petitioners in both these contempt petitions are the employees of the Adivasi Sewa Trust, Hind Nagar, Wardha, the respondents not complied with the common order passed by the learned School Tribunal, Nagpur on 29-7-1992 and the facts being common, both these contempt petitions are decided by this common Judgment.

  2. This is a Rule for contempt issued by my learned brother Hon'ble Shri Justice Sambre calling upon the respondents/contemners to show cause why they should not be dealt with for contempt of Court for having violated the order passed by the learned School Tribunal, Nagpur, on 29-7-1992 and another order passed by my learned brother Hon'ble Shri Justice Mutalik, on 2nd of March 1993 in contempt petitions Nos. 196/92 and 197/92.

  3. The facts leading to the Rule are chequered but can be put in a short compass.

    The respondents Nos. 1 and 2 are the Secretary and President of Adivasi Sewa Trust, Hind Nagar, Wardha respectively. The Adivasi Sewa Trust, Hind Nagar, Wardha is a public trust and registered Society. The said Society runs a School viz. Swargiya Sanjay Gandhi Adiwasi Vidyalaya at Panwadi, Tah. Arvi, Dist. Wardha. The school is recognised and getting grants from the State's Exchequer.

  4. The petitioner Shyam Sonbaji Gudadhe was appointed as a Jr. Clerk in the said School vide appointment order dated 6-11-1987, for a period of two years. However, according to the petitioner Shyam Gudadhe, though he was appointed as a Jr. Clerk, in the appointment order it has been shown that he is appointed as a Laboratory Attendant. Though the appointment order shows his appointment as a Laboratory Attendant, throughout the tenure of his service, he worked as a Jr. Clerk. He is H.S.S.C., and, therefore, eligible and qualified to work as Jr. Clerk. The services of the petitioner were terminated by order dated 20-4-1990 with effect from 30-4-1990. The petitioner challenged the order of termination preferring appeal No. STN/66/90 before the learned School Tribunal, Nagpur. The learned School Tribunal, Nagpur was pleased to grant ex parte ad interim injunction to the order of the termination vide order dated 2-5-1990.

  5. The petitioner Tukaram Khanduji Gaikwad was appointed as a Headmaster in the aforesaid School vide appointment order dated 24-6-1985. At the time of appointment, he was a trained Graduate teacher and eligible for being appointed to the post of Headmaster. The services of the petitioner were terminated under the pretext of acceptance of resignation alleged to have been tendered by the petitioner on 1-3-1990. The respondents Nos. 1 and 2, intimated the Education Officer, Wardha on 5-3-1990 about the resignation of the petitioner Shri Tukaram Gaikwad. According to the petitioner, he had not submitted any resignation at any time much less on 1st of March 1990. On the pretext that the petitioner has tendered his resignation, he was prevented from attending the School. The petitioner informed the Education Officer, Wardha, that he did not tender his resignation as alleged by the respondents Nos. 1 and 2.

    Being aggrieved by the pretext and preventing the petitioner from attending the School and performing his duties as a Headmaster, he preferred appeal before the School Tribunal, Nagpur, bearing No. STN/67/1990.

  6. Besides these two petitioners, other three employees also approached the School Tribunal, Nagpur. In all five appeals bearing Nos. STN/66/90, STN/67/90, STN/68/90, STN/69/90 and STN/70/90 were preferred by the employees including present petitioners. All the appellants filed a joint pursis duly signed by the parties before the learned Presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Nagpur and thereby they settled the matter. The terms of undertaking are to the following effect.

    (i) The respondent No. 1 has undertaken to reinstate all the five appellants with continuity of service in the posts held by them with effect from the date of their termination.

    (ii) Salary for the period commencing from 1-4-1990 till filing of pursis will be paid.

    (iii) The appellants give up the claim...

To continue reading

Request your trial

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT