Bombay High Court

PARAS BABULAL BARELIKARversusTHE NAGAON EDUCATION SOCIETY THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: S G CHAPALGAONKAR

Holding

The High Court held that the School Tribunal was correct in rejecting the application and dismissed the writ petition.

Summary

Paras Babulal Barelikar, a long‑serving employee of Nagaon Education Society, was terminated after being absent without leave from 5 March 2019. He appealed the termination before the School Tribunal under Section 9 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, focusing solely on the legality of the termination, not on his appointment. The petitioner then filed an application under Order 11 Rule 14 of the CPC seeking the proposal to the Education Officer, his service book, and the approval order, claiming they were relevant. The respondents contended that these documents were irrelevant because the appointment itself was undisputed, and the Tribunal rejected the application. The petitioner filed a writ petition challenging that rejection, but the High Court held the Tribunal’s decision was correct and dismissed the writ petition as without merit.

Issues considered

Whether the documents sought under Order 11 Rule 14 CPC are relevant to the question of the legality of the petitioner’s termination
Whether the School Tribunal was justified in rejecting the petitioner’s application for production of those documents

Legislation cited

Code of Civil Procedure — s. Order 11 Rule 14
Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 — s. 9

Subjects

termination of service
private school employees
MEPS Act
Order 11 Rule 14 CPC
writ petition
school tribunal
appointment legality
service book

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:12247
                                           (1)                    943-wp-3586-2025.odt



                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 3586 OF 2025

                               PARAS BABULAL BARELIKAR
                                           VERSUS
                     THE NAGAON EDUCATION SOCIETY THROUGH ITS
                                  PRESIDENT AND OTHERS
                                              ...
               Mr. Anudeep Dilip Sonar, Advocate for the Petitioner.
               Mr. S. N. Kendre, AGP for Respondents-State.
                                              ...
                                       CORAM : S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.
                                       DATED : 18th MARCH, 2026.
               P.C.:-

               1.     The present petition takes exception to order dated

               14.11.2024 passed below Exhibit-20 by Presiding Officer, School

               Tribunal, Nashik in Appeal No.8/2023.


               2.     The petitioner filed Appeal under Section 9 of Maharashtra

               Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation

               Act, 1977 (for short ‘MEPS Act’) before School Tribunal assailing

               order of termination.      Pertinently, respondents have filed say

               before Tribunal and admitted that petitioner has rendered 30 years

               of service and since he was absent without leave from 05.03.2019,

               his services have been terminated. Apparently, issue of legality of

               petitioner’s appointment would not arise before Tribunal.           Only

               validity of termination order would be subject matter for

               consideration in Appeal.
                              (2)                       943-wp-3586-2025.odt



3.      In this backdrop, petitioner filed application below Exhibit-20

purportedly under Order 11 rule 14 of Code of Civil Procedure

seeking       directions   against   respondents   to   file    documents

mentioned in application on record. The said documents are copy

of proposal sent to Education Officer seeking approval to

appointment, service book of appellant and order of approval

granted by Education Officer. It can be observed from reply filed

by respondent-Management that aforesaid documents would not be

relevant for deciding issue in question, as there is no dispute about

petitioner’s appointment and grant of approval to his service. The

Tribunal has rightly considered aforesaid aspects of matter and

rejected petitioner’s application below Exhibit-20.



4.      In result, writ petition sans merit. Hence, dismissed.



                                         (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR)
                                                  JUDGE
Devendra/March-2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…