Bombay High Court
Gurusphurthinath Bahuuddeshiya ... vs State Of Mah.Thr.Its Secty. & 2 Ors on 11 August, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
Judgment. wp4999.03
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 4999 OF 2003.
1. Gurusphurthinath Bahuuddeshiya
Shikshan Sanstha, Prem Nagar,
Nagpur, through its Secretary.
2. Baba Raghunath Swami High School,
through its Headmaster,
Rajeev Gandhi Nagar, Ward no.5,
Nagpur.
3. Vikas s/o Kacharu Jambhulkar,
Aged 30 years, resident of
Buddha Chowk, Lashkaribagh
17/23, near Siddhartha Kirana
Stores, Nagpur.
4. Gajanan Narayan Kashiwar,
Aged 30 years, resident of c/o.
Ramkrishna Korde, Marwadi Wadi,
Near Tulsinagar, Shantinagar,
Nagpur. ..... PETITIONERS.
VERSUS
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Dy. Director of Education,
Nagpur Region, Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 12/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2016 00:35:29 :::
Judgment. wp4999.03
2
3. Education Officer,
Secondary, Zilla Parishad,
Nagpur.
4. Project Development Officer,
Social Welfare Department,
Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.
5. Assistant Director, Employment
and Self Employment, District
Employment Exchange Officer,
Nagpur.
6. Gurusphurthinath Bahuuddeshiya
Shikshan Sanstha, Prem Nagar,
through its President Shri Udaram
Laxmanrao Dekate, Aged 68 years,
Occ - retired teacher, r/o. Prem
Nagar, Zenda Chowk, Nagpur.
7. Sau. Shantabai w/o Udaram Dekate,
aged 60 years, Vice President
of Gurusphurthinath Bahuuddeshiya
Shikshan Sanstha, r/o. Prem Nagar,
Nagpur.
8. Shilabai Arvind Bakde,
Secretary, Gurusphurthinath Bahuuddeshiya
Shikshan Sanstha, r/o. Prem Nagar,
Nagpur, age about 34 years,
occ - service, r/o. Ayodhya Nagar,
Nagpur.
9. Harihar Dondbaji Mohadikar,
Member, age 40 years, Golibar Chowk,
Nagpur.
::: Uploaded on - 12/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 13/08/2016 00:35:29 :::
Judgment. wp4999.03
3
10.Babarao Jagnnath Bawne,
aged 35 years, occ - business,
r/o. Prem Nagar, Nagpur.
11.Madhukar Pandurang Shorte,
aged 45 years, Occu - service,
r/o. Yogi Arvind Nagar,
Nagpur.
12.Vinod Nagorao Kohad,
aged 28 years, Occu - Education,
r/o. Khairi Pura, Nagpur.
13.Jyoti Gangadhar Thaore,
aged 40 years, Occu - Housewife,
r/o. Hirvinagar Layout,
Nagpur.
14.Rawanand Udaram Dekate,
aged 37 years, Occu - service,
r/o. Prem Nagar, Nagpur. ..... RESPONDENTS.
--------------------------
Shri A.D. Mohgaonkar, Advocate for Petitioners.
Shri N.R. Patil, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1 to 5.
Shri Dhabe, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 6 to 14.
--------------------------
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
KUM. INDIRA JAIN
,
J J.
DATE : AUGUST 11, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.)
Judgment. wp4999.03
Though respective Counsel want to argue the matter
at length, considering the nature of controversy, we do not find
it necessary, at least in present facts.
2. On 05.03.2004, we have passed the following
order :
" Smt. S.S. Wandile, learned AGP
has filed submissions on behalf of respondent
no.2. The same is taken on record. Copies
of the same are furnished to the other sides.
Heard.
Rule.
In the meantime, there will be
ad-interim order in terms of prayer clause
[2] which will operate till 23rd July, 2004.
In the meantime, the
management is at liberty to exploit all
possibilities to fill in the backlog and in spite
of their efforts they are not able to do so,
make a representation to the respondent,
Education Department to permit them to
appoint persons on temporary basis against
those seats which are meant for reserved
Judgment. wp4999.03
category candidates. Similarly, the
respondent, Education Department can also
recommend candidates from reserved
category for the purpose of appointment with
the petitioner management."
3. Thereafter, though there is no express order
continuing interim relief in favour of petitioners, petitioner nos.
3 and 4 are continued in employment even today and an order
of confirmation of their approval is issued by the Education
Department on 01.06.2005.
4. Shri Dhabe, learned Counsel appearing for
respondent nos. 6 to 14 submits that respondent nos. 6 to 14 at
the relevant time were manging the affairs of the school. He
submits that petitioner no.1 is taking help of petitioner no.2
Headmaster and with his aid is trying to run the entire
administration. Petitioner nos. 3 and 4 who have been illegally
recruited by violating the roaster requirement also helped
them.
Judgment. wp4999.03
5. He has invited attention to the fact that the
advertisement dated 12.07.2001 in response to which
petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are recruited, was infact for filling in 4
vacancies and as such there was no question of filling in the
backlog in future.
6. Our attention is also invited to order dated
13.04.2014 passed by this Court on Civil Application No.
2476/2004, by which we have permitted respondents to be
impleaded.
7. Taking over all view of the matter we find it
convenient to place the entire controversy for fresh
consideration by respondent no.2 Deputy Director. The Deputy
Director can verify the records of school with the assistance of
respondents as also petitioners and find out whether after
orders of this Court dated 05.03.2004, there has been any
subsequent recruitment and backlog has been taken care of or
Judgment. wp4999.03
not. The petitioners, as also respondent nos. 6 to 14 are not in
a position to point out immediately whether any such
recruitment has taken place or not. According to Shri Dhabe,
learned counsel there may not be any such recruitment.
8. Learned A.G.P. on the basis of records available with
him has submitted that at the relevant time sanctioned strength
was in excess of 15.
9. We therefore, find it difficult to believe that after
recruitment in the year 2001, in past 15 years, there has been
no recruitment in the school. However, considering the fact
that petitioner nos. 3 and 4 are working in the school and have
been given permanent approval, it will be in the fitness of
things to direct the parties to appear before respondent no.2 -
Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpur on
31.08.2016. Respondent no.2 shall after hearing the parties
and perusal of records of petitioner no.2 School, take a
necessary decision on the controversy within next three
Judgment. wp4999.03
months.
10. Keeping all rival contentions open and with above
directions we dispose of the writ petition. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Rgd.
Judgment. wp4999.03
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this judgment/order uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed judgment/order.
Uploaded by : R.G. Dhuriya. Uploaded on : 12.08.2016
Pvt. Sec.
