PARAS BABULAL BARELIKAR v. THE NAGAON EDUCATION SOCIETY
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 18 Mar 2026
- Bench
- S G CHAPALGAONKAR
Provisions considered
- Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 O. 11 r. 14
Judgment
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.:-
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.
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
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.
In result, writ petition sans merit. Hence, dismissed. Devendra/March-2026 (S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR) JUDGE
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 — O. 11 r. 14.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Bombay High Court, on 18 Mar 2026. The bench was S G CHAPALGAONKAR.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.