Bombay High Court
Sopan Purshotam Patil And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 15 April, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
1 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1002 OF 2016
Ramling s/o. Amrutrao Patil
and 33 others ..Petitioners
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 13 others
ig ..Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1025 OF 2016
Sopan s/o. Purushotam Patil
and others ..Petitioners
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 04 others ..Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1001 OF 2016
Madhukar s/o. Yadavrao Ingle ..Petitioner
versus
::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:38 :::
2 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 04 others ..Respondents
--
In all petitions :
Mr.A.D.Pawar, advocate for petitioners
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, for respondents - State
--
ig CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 15, 2016
ORAL ORDER :
Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With
the consent of the learned counsel appearing for
the parties, the petition is taken up for final
hearing at admission stage.
3. The petitioners are the employees of private
aided Ashram Schools, which are made respondents in
the present Writ Petitions. The petitioners are
claiming their entitlement to higher pay scale
3 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
under Assured Career Progress Scheme (for short
'the ACPS') on completion of 12 years of qualifying
service from the respective dates of their initial
appointments.
4. It is the contention of the petitioners that
the employees serving in private aided Ashram
Schools are discriminated and have been denied
benefits under the ACPS, whereas the said benefits
are made available to the Ashram Schools conducted
by the Social Welfare Department, and other private
aided schools conducted by other Departments.
5. The issue raised in the petition is no more
res integra in view of the judgment of the Division
Bench delivered at the Principal Seat of the Bombay
High Court in Writ Petition No.2358/2013 and other
companion matters decided on 21st September, 2013.
The Division Bench in paragraph nos. 17 to 19 of
the order has observed thus:-
4 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
"17. The Assured Career Progress Scheme is a
welfare scheme which is basically brought
about to remove stagnation as very few
promotion avenues are available to Group `C"
and `D" employees. The ACPS enables the
eligible employees to be placed in higher pay
scale. The eligible non-teaching staff of the
aided Secondary Schools in Group `C' and `D'
category gets the benefit of ACPS. But the
similar category of employees in the aided
private Ashram Schools who perform identical
duties have been denied the benefit of ACPS
which infringes their fundamental rights under
Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of
India. The action of denial of benefits to
the similarly placed employees discharging
similar duties is arbitrary and violative of
Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
18. Only on the basis of purported ground of
financial crunch, we fail to understand the
5 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
approach of the State Government of
discriminating between the non-teaching staff
of aided Ashram Schools and non-teaching staff
of aided private Schools. At one stage both
the Schools were functioning under the control
of only one department.
19. In our view the denial of benefit of ACPS
amounts to discrimination, which is hit by the
rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the
Constitution of India."
6. In view of the decision rendered by the
Division Bench, referred to above, the present
petition deserves to be allowed, and the same is
accordingly allowed.
7. The respondents are directed to examine the
case of each individual petitioner for deciding
whether, they satisfy the criteria laid down for
6 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
claiming benefits under the ACPS to the private
aided schools under the Government Resolution dated
30th April 1998, as modified from time to time, and
if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to
claim benefits under the ACPS and if they satisfy
the eligibility criteria, the respondents shall
extend the benefits to the petitioners. The
respondents shall scrutinize the case of individual
petitioner within a period of six months and extend
the benefits to such of the petitioners who are
found eligible, as expeditiously as possible,
preferably, within a period of six months from such
scrutiny.
8. Rule made absolute in the above terms. The
writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]
kbp
