Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

Mr.R.G.Deo, learned counsel waives service for respondent No.2.

Mr.Deshpande, undertakes to serve copies on Mr.Deo, learned counsel today itself."

2. After hearing all the sides and while admitting these petitions by order dated 29/01/1998, this Court arrived at a prima-facie conclusion that all such schools which were covered u/s 16 of the E.P.F. Act. By the combined reading of Rules 19 and 20 of the MEPS Rules, 1981 with paragraph No.16 of clause 3.2 of the Secondary School Code, such schools were exempted from the applicability of the E.P.F. and M.P. Act. The order dated 29/01/1998 reads as under :-

" Heard Shri C.R.Deshpande, counsel for petitioner, Shri R.C.Deo, Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 in Writ Petition khs/FEB.2017/391-d Nos.379/98, 380/98, 381/98, 389/98 and 390/98 and Shri Alok Sharma, Additional Standing Counsel for respondent No.2 in Writ Petition Nos.390/98, 401/98 and 402/98 and Shri.S.V.Chillarge, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1.
On a combined reading of Rules 19 and 20 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 and paragraph 16 of Clause 3.2 of the Secondary School Code, it is prima-facie evident that the provisions of the Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 are not applicable to the employees working in recognised private schools whether aided or unaided.