Shubhada Uttam More v. The State Of Maharashtra, Through Secretary, Education And Sports Dept And ORS
(10)WP453214.doc.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4532 OF 2014 Shubhada Uttam More ..Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others ..Respondents Mr. Vinayak R. Kumbhar I/by Mr. Sagar A. Mane, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Ms. Shruti D. Vyas, "B" Panel Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 to 6 & 14, 16 - State.
Mr. Abhijeet A. Joshi, Advocate for Respondent No.11. Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for Respondent No.19. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI & DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JJ.
DATE : 25th MARCH, 2019 P.C.
1] The Petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 30th March 2013, passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur.
2] It appears that at the instance of present Petitioner, the Public Interest Litigation came to be filed being No.180 of 2012, in which an order came to be passed on 26th February 2013 to conduct an enquiry into the affairs of Respondent No.19. The Deputy Director of Education after giving hearing to all the concerned BGP. 1 of 2
(10)WP453214.doc.
persons including the present Petitioner came to a conclusion that the allegations made by the Petitioner that the schools run by the Respondent No.19 are illegal, is without any substance. 3] Being aggrieved thereby, the Petitioner has approached this Court.
4] It appears that the Petitioner is disgruntled employee having strained relationship with Respondent No.19. The extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India cannot be permitted to be used at the behest of the employee to settle score on the employer. In any event, the Committee under the chairmanship of Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur has found no substance in allegations of the Petitioner. The Writ Petition stands disposed of.
[DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.] [B. R. GAVAI, J.] BGP. 2 of 2