Bombay High Court
East Khandesh Education Society, ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Another on 11 August, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
7676.2015WP.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.7676 OF 2015
1. East Khandesh Education
Society, Jalgaon,
Through its President
Arvind Bankatlal Lathi,
Age-64 Years, Occu-Business,
R/o. Jalha Peth, Jalgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon.
2. Raosaheb Rupchand Vidyalaya,
Jalgaon, Through its Head Master
Dagadu Sudam Sarode,
Age- 51 years, Occu-Service,
R/o. Jilha Peth, Jalgaon. PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Education Officer (Secondary)
Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. RESPONDENTS
...
Ms.Seema T. Pawar, Advocate h/f. Mr.
A.G.Talhar, Advocate for the petitioners
Mr.P.N.Kutti, AGP for Respondent nos.1 and 2.
...
::: Uploaded on - 12/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2016 00:37:59 :::
7676.2015WP.odt
2
CORAM: S.S.SHINDE &
SANGITRAO S.PATIL,JJ.
Reserved on : 05.08.2016
Pronounced on : 11.08.2016
JUDGMENT: (Per S.S.Shinde, J.):
1. Heard.
2.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith
and heard finally with the consent of the
parties.
3. This Petition takes exception to the
impugned order dated 08.12.2011 passed by
respondent no.2, and further seeks direction
against respondent no.2 to grant approval to
the post of Laboratory Assistant as per the
proposals submitted by the petitioner -
institution.
4. The learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners tendered across the Bar
copies of the additional documents. The same
7676.2015WP.odt
are taken on record. She submits that the
petitioner - society, after following due
procedure of law, issued an advertisement in
the newspaper and after adherence to the
relevant procedure, appointed one Mr. Dilip
Raghunath Patil to the vacant and sanctioned
post of Laboratory Assistant in view of the
fact that one of the employees of the school
namely, Mr. Ashok Rajaram Kulkarni retired on
attaining the age of superannuation. The
petitioner society submitted a proposal for
approval to the Education Officer along with
the relevant documents. However, the same has
been rejected by the Education Officer on the
ground that as per the Government Resolution
dated 25.11.2005, the post is not sanctioned
and moreover as per the Government Resolution
dated 10.06.2010, there is a ban on
recruitment in the school.
5. It is further submitted that the
petitioner filed various representations
7676.2015WP.odt
dated 15.04.2013, 07.12.2013 and 10.02.2014
and it was brought to the notice of the
authorities that there is no legal impediment
for granting approval to the appointment of
Mr.Dilip Raghunath Patil to the post of
Laboratory Assistant. It is submitted that
the respondent Education Officer did not
forward the name of any surplus employees for
absorption in the school run by the
petitioner society, and therefore, raising
the ground that there are surplus employees
to be absorbed and there is general ban on
recruitment cannot be countenanced. The
learned counsel invites our attention to the
various letters written to the Deputy
Director of Education by the petitioner no.2
and submits that the Petition deserves to be
allowed.
6. On the other hand, the learned AGP
appearing for respondent - State relying upon
the contents of the impugned order submits
7676.2015WP.odt
that the appointment of the said Mr.Dilip
Raghunath Patil is not on sanctioned post,
and therefore, the Education Officer has
rightly observed the approval cannot be
granted to the appointment of Mr. Dilip
Raghunath Patil.
7.
We have given careful consideration
to the submissions of the learned Counsel
appearing for the parties. With their able
assistance, perused the pleadings in the
petition, annexures thereto and the
compilation of the additional documents
tendered across the Bar by the advocate
appearing for the petitioners. It appears
that petitioner no.2 wrote a letter to the
Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla
Parishad, Jalgaon, in the year 2010-11,
requesting therein to allow them to advertise
the post i.e. the post of Laboratory
Assistant. It further appears that the
Resolution was passed, appointing the said
7676.2015WP.odt
Mr.Dilip Patil in pursuance of the selection
process carried out according to the
prescribed procedure. Therefore, so far as
procedural part is concerned, prima facie,
there appears to be compliance of the mandate
of the Maharashtra Employees of Private
Schools (Conditions of Service) Act and the
Rules and the relevant provisions.
8. The Education Officer assigned
cryptic reasons that there was a ban for
recruitment and the post is not sanctioned.
The Education Officer ought to have
considered the contentions of the petitioners
in detail. It appears that the petitioners
approached by way of filing representations
to the Education Officer and also to the
Deputy Director of Education, requesting
therein for grant of approval. We cannot
approve the cryptic reasons given by the
Education Officer without adverting to the
record maintained by the petitioner society.
7676.2015WP.odt
9. In that view of the matter, in our
opinion, the ends of justice would meet in
case the impugned order is quashed and set
aside and the Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon is directed to re-
consider the entire issue after hearing and
allowing the petitioners to place on record
the documents in support of their case.
Accordingly, the impugned order dated
08.12.2011 is quashed and set aside, the
proposal submitted by the petitioners for
approval to the services of Mr. Dilip
Raghunath Patil is restored to its original
file. We direct respondent no.2 to take
decision afresh after hearing and allowing
the petitioners to place on record the
documents in support of their contentions.
The petitioners shall appear before the
Education Officer on 22.08.2016 at 11.00 a.m.
The Education Officer may hear the
7676.2015WP.odt
petitioners and also allow them to place on
record the copies of documents and also after
perusing the original record maintained by
the petitioner society, may take decision on
or before 15.09.2016. In case it is not
possible for the Education Officer for
unavoidable reasons to hear the petitioners
on 22.08.2016, he may fix another date during
the week commencing from 22.08.2016, however,
take decision afresh as expeditiously as
possible, however, on or before 15.09.2016
and communicate the said decision to the
petitioners.
10. We have not expressed any opinion on
merits of the contentions raised by the
petitioners and it is open for the Education
Officer to look into the original record and
documents placed on record and then pass
appropriate orders.
7676.2015WP.odt
11. The rule is made absolute partly.
The Writ Petition is disposed of accordingly.
No costs.
Sd/- Sd/-
[SANGITRAO S.PATIL] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DDC
