Mahomed Abbas Ali Khan Vs. Sahu Gokul Chand and ors. - Court Judgment

Excerpt:
- cantonments act[c.a. no. 41/2006]. section 346 & cantonment fund (servants rules, 1937, rules 13, 14 & 15: [h.l. gokhale, ag. cj, p.v. hardas, naresh h. patil, r.m. borde & r.m. savant, jj] jurisdiction of school tribunal constituted under maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) regulations act, (3 of 1978) held, school run by the cantonment board is a primary school and it is not a school recognised by any such board comparable to the divisional board or the state board. the school tribunal constituted under section 8 of the maharashtra act cannot entertain appeals filed under section 9 by the employees working in schools which are established and administered by the cantonment board. teacher employed in the school run by cantonment board being covered under rule 2 (f) of the cantonment fund servants rules, 1937 can file appeal under rules 13, 14 and 15 to authorities provided therein against any order imposing any penalties etc. [deolali cantonment board v usha devidas dongre, 1993 mah. lj 74; 1993 lab ic 1858 overruled]. -- maharashtra employees of private schools (conditions of service) regulations act, 1978 [act no. 3/1978]. sections 9 & 2(21): jurisdiction of school tribunal whether a school run by cantonment board is not a recognised school within the meaning of section 2(21)? - held, the act is enacted to regulate recruitments and conditions of employees in certain private schools and provisions of the act shall apply to all private schools in the state whether receiving any grant-in-aid from the state government or not. private school is defined in section 2(2) of the act as a recognised school established or administered by a management other than the government or a local authority. recognised means recognised by director, the divisional board or state board. thus as far as the first part of the definition of being recognised is concerned, it includes, as stated above, four directors, the divisional boards and four state boards. the second part of this definition which comes after the comma refers to any officer authorised by director or by any of such boards. the question to be examined is whether school run by the cantonment board could be said to be one run by any such boards. a private school has to be recognised by the state or the divisional board or by any officer authorised in that behalf. when this phrase namely: recognised by any officer authorised by the director or by any such boards, is included in the latter part of section 2(21), such boards will be of the level of the state board or the divisional board. the boards referred to in the definition of the word recognised means the boards which deal with education at levels other than that of the level at which primary schools are operating. thus for being recognised, the school has to be recognised by the board and therefore, it has to be operating at a higher level i.e., secondary level. section 2(21) of the act defines the term recognised. the last clause therein is by any of such boards. the term such is defined in oxford dictionary as of the kind or degree indicated or implied by the context. therefore, the term such board will have to mean a divisional board of or the level of divisional board or the state board. the divisional board holds the examination and issues certificates after 10th and 12th standard examinations. the state board advises the state government on policy matters, ensures uniform pattern of secondary and higher secondary education, lays down principles for determining syllabi, prescribes text books, etc. the cantonment board does not discharge any of such duties nor is there any other board or body under the cantonments act discharging any such duties. the duties of the cantonment board are laid down in section 62 and amongst others, clause (xiv) lays down the duties of establishing and maintaining or assisting primary schools only. the cantonment board is not required to enter into the area of secondary education. therefore, school run by the cantonment board is a primary school and it is not a school recognised by any such board comparable to the divisional board or the state board. that being the position, it is not possible to accept it to be a recognised school for being a private school under the act. for the reasons state above, the school tribunal constituted under section 8 of the act cannot entertain appeals filed under section 9 by the employees working in schools which are established and administered by the cantonment board. [deolali cantonment board v usha devidas dongre, 1993 mah.lj 74; 1993 lab ic 1858 overruled]. - the plaint, as framed, does not disclose at all clearly the nature of the suit. the suit is clearly barred by time and the appeal must succeed.neave, j.1. the defendant-appellant, muhammad abbas ali khan purchased certain land at an auction sale in execution of a mortgage decree. on the 19th of june, 1917, he leased this property td the other four defendants for one year at a rental of rs. 200. out of this rs. 100 was paid to him on the same day and apparently rs. 32-8 a few days later.2. on the 3rd of july, 1917, the same land was sold in execution of a prior mortgage decree and purchased by the plaintiff-respondent. rs. 67-8 was paid by defendants 1 to 4 to him as the balance of the rent due for the year 1325 fasli. on the 30th of april, 1921, he brought the present suit against all the defendants to recover the rs. 132-8 paid to the present appellant with interest. the plaint, as framed, does not disclose at all clearly the nature of the suit. the first court held that the claim was barred by limitation and it dismissed the suit. the lower appellate court, however, has found that the cause of action did not arise till the end of the fasli year 1325, and that, therefore, the suit was within time.3. the only point taken in appeal is that of limitation, and it is contended that time must run from the date of payment of the rs. 132-8 to the appellant. the only article, which appears to apply to the case is article 109:for the profits of immovable property belonging to the plaintiff which has been wrongfully received by the defendant.4. under this article the period of limitation begins to run when the profits are received. the suit is clearly barred by time and the appeal must succeed. the order of the court below is set aside and the plaintiff's suit is dismissed with costs in all courts including fees in this court on the higher scale.