Authority: Bombay High Court (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction)

Order Date: 7 October 2026

Case Overview

  • Petitioners: Shailendra Education Society and its Secondary School (Marathi), represented by Senior Advocates Mihir Desai and Chetan Mali.
  • Respondent: Rajkumar Maruti Patil, appointed as Shikshan Sevak (2008) and later Assistant Teacher (2013) in the school run by the Society.
  • Allegations: On 19 January 2017 a Class‑VII student alleged that Patil sexually molested a classmate; FIR No. 41/2017 was lodged under IPC Section 354‑A and POCSO Sections 8 & 12.
  • Criminal proceedings: Patil was arrested (26 Jan 2017‑31 Jan 2017), remanded to judicial custody (1 Feb 2017), and later released on bail (20 June 2017) with a condition prohibiting entry into Dahisar Police Station jurisdiction.
  • Suspension & departmental enquiry: School Committee suspended Patil retrospectively from 25 Jan 2017; no subsistence allowance was paid during suspension. An enquiry committee was constituted (8 Nov 2017) but proceeded despite Patil’s inability to attend due to bail conditions, relying on his representative.
  • Procedural defects cited: lack of ten‑day notice, denial of personal cross‑examination, non‑supply of witness list and documentary evidence, and failure to provide a summary of proceedings within the statutory period.
  • Tribunal outcome: The School Tribunal (16 July 2019) set aside the termination and ordered 50 % back wages.
  • Petition: The Society appealed, seeking quashing of the Tribunal’s order and termination.

Final Outcome

1. The writ petition is partly allowed; the Tribunal’s order dated 16 July 2019 is modified.

2. The termination order dated 30 June 2018 is quashed and set aside.

3. Patil is reinstated as Assistant Teacher solely to enable completion of the disciplinary enquiry; reinstatement does not amount to exoneration.

4. The Management must resume the enquiry from the point after service of the charge‑sheet (7 Dec 2017), providing Patil a proper opportunity to participate, inspect evidence, and cross‑examine witnesses.

5. All proceedings conducted after that stage are set aside.

6. The fresh enquiry must comply with the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, the MEPS Rules, and principles of natural justice.

7. Patil is entitled to subsistence allowance and other benefits during suspension, subject to applicable provisions; the Management shall determine the entitlement.

8. The question of back wages, continuity of service, and other monetary or service benefits remains open and will be decided after the fresh enquiry concludes.

9. The Tribunal’s direction to pay 50 % back wages is set aside.

10. Compensatory cost orders of Rs 25,000 each against Patil and Headmaster Sudam Ganpat Kumbhar are set aside.

11. The petition is disposed of without any order as to costs; all pending interim applications stand disposed.

12. The Management is directed to complete the fresh disciplinary proceedings within four months.

Topics: Legal Dispute, Education Employment