1 wp6162.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.6162 of 2016
1. Kelapur Education Society,
through its Secretary Narsinghrao
Ragholu Saturwar, Aged 66 years,
r/o. Pandharkawada, Tq.Pandharkawada.
Distt. Yavatmal.
2. Naresh s/o. Madhukar Chatki,
Aged 32 years, Occ. Jr. Clerk,
K.E.S. Girls School, Pandharkawada,
Tq.Pandharkawada, Distt.Yavatmal.
3. Sushil s/o. Tulshiram Lokhande,
Aged 29 years, Occ. Jr. Clerk,
K.E.S. Boys School, Pandharkawada,
Tq.Pandharkawada, Distt.Yavatmal. .. PETITIONERS
.. Versus ..
1. State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary to Secondary
Education Department, Mantralaya
Mumbai-32.
2. Director of Education,
Maharashtra State, Pune.
3. Deputy Director of Education,
Amravati Region, Amravati.
4. Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal. .. RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/04/2017 00:49:46 :::
2 wp6162.16.odt
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Mr.R.L.Khapre, Advocate for the Petitioners.
Ms R.V.Kalia, A.G.P. for Respondents.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
CORAM : B.R.GAVAI &
A.S.CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATED : April 19, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J. )
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. The petitioners have approached this Court being aggrieved by the Order passed by the Education Officer, Yavatmal dt.7.6.2016 thereby rejecting the proposal submitted by the petitioners for grant of approval to the appointments of the Junior Clerks.
3. Petitioner no.1/Society, on the vacancy of Junior Clerks having occurred, had applied to respondent no.4/Education Officer for grant of permission to fill in the posts of Junior Clerks. Accordingly, said permission was granted on 31.7.2014. In pursuance to the said permission, advertisement was issued and after due selection process, petitioner nos. 2 and 3 came to be appointed. After their appointments, the proposal was sent to the ::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/04/2017 00:49:46 ::: 3 wp6162.16.odt Education Officer for grant of approval. Needless to state that, prior to their appointments, necessary approval of Assistant Commissioner (Backward Class Cell), Amravati region, Amravati for determining roster point was already obtained. However, since the proposal for grant of approval was not considered, the petitioners approached this Court by way of Writ Petition No.2385 of 2015. This Court vide order dt.12.4.2016 disposed of Writ Petition No.2385 of 2015 and directed the Education Officer to decide the proposal submitted by petitioner no.1 within the stipulated period after grant of hearing to the concerned parties.
4. By the impugned order, the Education Officer rejected the said proposal on the ground that the appointments were in violation of the Government Resolution dt.20.6.2014 inasmuch as prior approval of Special Committee was not obtained. It has been observed by the Education Officer that, in view of the said Government Resolution, first the surplus staff available in the District has to be absorbed and thereafter, only appointments can be made.
5. Similar situation came up for consideration before the Division Bench of this Court (comprising of B.P.Dharmadhikari, J and Mrs. Swapna Joshi, J) in a bunch of Writ Petitions bearing Writ Petition No.4888 of 2016 and companion petitions which were decided on 14.2.2017. It has been held by this Court that the ::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/04/2017 00:49:46 ::: 4 wp6162.16.odt petitioner/Society cannot be blamed inasmuch as the posts were filled in after due permission was granted by the Education Officer. It has further been held that it is not as if the petitioners were not brought to notice the Government Resolution dt.20.6.2014. It has further been observed that the appointments were made after following due selection process. As such, the petitions were allowed.
6. We find that, prior to appointing petitioners 2 and 3, the Management has followed everything that was required in law. Prior permission of Education Officer was obtained. Not only that, roster point was also verified from the Competent Authority i.e. Assistant Commissioner (Backward Class Cell), Amravati region, Amravati. It is not the case of any of the parties that petitioner nos. 2 and 3 do not possess requisite qualification. In that view of the matter, we direct the respondent/Education Officer to grant approval to the appointments of petitioners from the date of their selection. Needless to state that all consequential benefits regarding payment of salary shall follow.
With the above observations and directions, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
JAISWAL
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 21/04/2017 00:49:46 :::