Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
SCA/12953/2000 2/ 4 JUDGMENT
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL
CIVIL APPLICATION No. 12953 of 2000
For
Approval and Signature:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
=============================================================
1
Whether
Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
2
To be
referred to the Reporter or not ?
3
Whether
their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?
4
Whether
this case involves a substantial question of law as to the
interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order
made thereunder ?
5
Whether
it is to be circulated to the civil judge ?
=============================================================
SUREKHABEN
N RAINDANI - Petitioner(s)
Versus
STATE
OF GUJARAT & 3 - Respondent(s)
=========================================================
Appearance
:
MR
JD AJMERA for
Petitioner(s) : 1,
MR JK SHAH, LD.ASST.GOVERNMENT PLEADER for
Respondent(s) : 1 - 2.
RULE SERVED for Respondent(s) : 3,
MR RA
MISHRA for Respondent(s) :
4,
=========================================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI
Date
: 13/05/2010
ORAL
JUDGMENT
By
way of present petition, the petitioner has inter alia prayed for
quashing and setting aside the order dated 01st September
1999 passed by the respondent No.2 and order dated 17th
November 1999 and directing the respondents to pay arrears of salary
for the period from 27th July 1982 to 30th
September 1992 with interest at the rate of 18% per annum.
It
is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was appointed as
Assistant Teacher in Higher Secondary School of the respondent
No.4-Trust. The petitioner is B.A., B.Ed. The petitioner was made
permanent on 2nd/3rd June 1980 in the school
run by the respondent No.4. Thereafter, on 07th June
1982, the service of the petitioner was terminated by the respondent
No.4-School by notice dated 26th April 1982 on account of
closure of higher secondary classes.
It
is further the case of the petitioner that thereafter the petitioner
preferred Special Civil Application No.4647 of 1983 before this
Court challenging her termination since she was not absorbed in any
other school. In pursuance of the order dated 23rd March
1992, the petitioner was absorbed in the secondary school of the
respondent No.4. In respect of the backwages, the respondent No.3
was directed by this Court to decide the same. The respondent No.3
thereafter on the representation made by the petitioner ordered the
respondent-School Management to pay back wages to the petitioner.
Being aggrieved by the order of the respondent No.3-DEO, the
respondent-School made a representation to the respondent- State
Government. The respondent No.2-Commissioner of Schools heard the
parties and vide order dated 01st September 1999 held
that since the petitioner has not worked for the said period, she is
not entitled to salary and thereby, quashed and set aside the order
passed by the respondent No.3-DEO. Being aggrieved by the same, the
petitioner made a representation dated 06th October 1999
to the respondent-State Government, which ultimately came to be
rejected vide order dated 17th November 1999. Hence, the
present petition.
Mr.J.K.
Shah, learned Assistant Government Pleader, has relied upon the
affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent-Commissioner of
Mid-Day Meals and Schools and submitted that the orders passed by
the respondent-authorities are just and proper since the petitioner
has not worked for the period in question in any educational
institution receiving grant-in-aid. The respondent-authorities have
passed the orders after taking into consideration the pros and cons
of the matter and therefore, the present petition is required to be
dismissed.
Having
considered the contentions raised by the learned advocates for the
respective parties, documents produced on record, the averments made
in the petition as well as reply affidavit filed by the
respondent-authority as well as the affidavit-in-rejoinder, it
transpires that the petitioner has been ordered to be absorbed in
the respondent-School vide order dated 23rd March 1992
passed by this Court (Coram : N.J. Pandya, J) while dealing with
Special Civil Application No.4647 of 1983, wherein this Court in
paragraph 9 has categorically observed that for want of certain
details, the issue of deciding the backwages is left to be decided
by the respondent No.3. The respondent No.3 has decided in favour of
the petitioner. However, as the respondent No.4-School made a
representation to the respondent-State Government, the respondent
No.2 held that since the petitioner has not worked a period of more
than 10 years, she is not entitled to any backwages. The respondent
No.2 after taking into consideration the pros and cons of the matter
has decided the matter and he has assigned cogent and convincing
reasons for not awarding backwages to the petitioner. Thus, when the
petitioner has not worked for a period of about 10 years, she is not
entitled to any backwages as prayed for. It is required to be noted
that there is nothing on record to show that the respondent-School
Management has deliberately deprived the petitioner from resuming
her duty. Thus, the impugned orders passed by the
respondent-authorities are just and proper. I do not find any
illegality or material irregularity in the said orders. Thus, the
present petition is devoid of any substance and merit and the same
is required to be dismissed.
In
view of aforesaid observations and discussion, the present petition
fails and is, accordingly, dismissed. Rule is discharged with no
order as to costs. Interim relief, if any, stands vacated.
(K.S.
Jhaveri, J)
Aakar
Top