Bombay High Court
Premsing Lalsing Chavan And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 5 December, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
{1}
wp 12059.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.12059 OF 2016
1 Premsing Lalsingh Chavan
age: 50 years, occu: service as
Primary Hostel Superinendent,
R/o Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Daheli Tanda, Tq. Kinwat
District: Nanded.
2 Ganesh Gangadhar Kamphewad
Age: 49 years, occu: service
as Maditnis (helper)
R/o Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Daheli Tanda, Tq. Kinwat
District: Nanded.
3 Vishal Hari Rathod,
Age: 40 years, occu: service,
at Kamathi
R/o Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Daheli Tanda, Tq. Kinwat
District: Nanded.
4 Sanjay Shamrao Pawar,
age: 48 years, occu: service,
as cook
R/o Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Daheli Tanda, Tq. Kinwat
District: Nanded.
5 Ramchandra Dhondiram Chitkare
age: 46 years, occu: service as cook
R/o Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Daheli Tanda, Tq. Kinwat
District: Nanded. Petitioners
Versus
1 The State of Maharashtra,
Through Its Secretary,
Social Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai
::: Uploaded on - 08/12/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 09/12/2016 00:42:36 :::
{2}
wp 12059.16.odt
2 The Director,
V.J.N.T., OBC & SBC Special
Assistant Department, Maharashtra State
Pune
3 The Regional Deputy Commissioner,
Social Welfare Latur Division, Latur
4 The Assistant Commissioner,
Social Welfare Department Nanded
5 Dhavji Naik Primary Ashram School
Through Head Master Respondents
(Name of respondent No.5
stands deleted as per the order
dated 5.12.2016.)
Mr.A.V. Indrale Patil advocate for the petitioners
Mr.S.J. Salgare, Assistant Govt. Pleader for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4
(Name of respondent No.5 stands deleted as per the order dated
5.12.2016) _______________
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
SANGITRAO S. PATIL , JJ
(Date : 5th December, 2016.)
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: R.M. Borde, J)
1 Heard.
2 At the request of learned counsel for the petitioner, name of
respondent No.5 stands deleted.
3 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of
the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing and disposal
{3}
wp 12059.16.odt
at the admission stage.
4 The issue raised in the instant petition is no more
res integra and is also covered by the Judgment delivered by the
Division Bench at the Principal seat in Writ petition No.2358/2013
and other companion matters, decided on 21st September, 2013.
5 The aforesaid decision has been followed in number of
matters, including a group of petitions bearing Writ Petition
No.7256/2011 and other companion matters, decided by the
Division Bench of this Court on 2nd December, 2013, to which one
of us (R.M. Borde, J) is a member. In view of the decisions,
referred to above, the instant writ petition also deserves to be
allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.
6 The respondents are directed to examine the cases of each
of the individual petitioner for deciding whether they satisfy the
criteria laid down for claiming benefits under the ACPS to the
private aided Government 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 Scheme, and they satisfy the eligibility criteria, the
respondents shall extend the benefits to the petitioners. The
{4}
wp 12059.16.odt
respondents shall scrutinize the cases of individual petitioners
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 four months from such scrutiny.
7 Rule is made absolute in the above terms. The Writ Petition
stands disposed of in the above terms.
(SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J) (R.M.BORDE, J)
vbd
