Fr. Walter Saldanha, S.J. And ANR v. Pune Cantonment Board And ANR

- 1 - vat

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (L) No.12761 OF 2015 Fr. Walter Saldhana, S.J. & Anr.

...Petitioners

Vs.

Pune Cantonment Board and Anr.

...Respondents

*********** Mr.Nitin P. Deshpande for Petitioner None for Respondents *********** CORAM : V. M. KANADE & Dr. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : OCTOBER 9, 2015 P.C. :

1.

By this petition, which is filed in the form of PIL under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner is seeking the following reliefs.

"(a) that this Hon'ble Court may direct the Respondents to implement the applicability of the provisions of CFSR 1937 in respect of its primary teachers and staff on contract in its schools and subsequently, the provisions of Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009; (b) that this Hon'ble court may make the same specifically applicable to the schools of all cantonment, Local Authorities and Municipal Corporations;

(c) that this Hon'ble Court may direct the Respondents to 1/3

- 2 - pay the Provident Fund of all its contract employees from the date of applicability;

(d) interim relief seeking direction to the Respondents to refrain from discontinuing services of any of the contract employees in the Cantonments' Schools till the decision of this Hon'ble Court;

(e) The Hon'ble court may at its discretion take cognizance of and enforce suo-motu, obligation on all Public Authorities to rectify and remedy statutory irregularities, whenever brought to their notice through complaint or when irregularities come to the force or when information is provided under the RTI Act, to help prevent litigation; (f) for costs;

(g) for such other and further reliefs as the nature and circumstances of the case may require."

2.

The persons, who are aggrieved, are in a position to approach this Court for redressal of their grievances. Hence, we are not inclined to entertain this PIL. PIL is dismissed, reserving the right of the aggrieved persons to challenge the impugned order, if any, passed by the Cantonment Board.

[Dr. SHALINI PHANSALKAR-JOSHI, J.] [ V. M. KANADE, J.] Vaishali Tikam 2/3

- 3 - 3/3