Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Nitin Ashruba Tidke vs State Of Maharashtra And Others
2016 Latest Caselaw 3135 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 3135 Bom
Judgement Date : 23 June, 2016

Bombay High Court
Nitin Ashruba Tidke vs State Of Maharashtra And Others on 23 June, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
                                                             5177.2015WP.odt
                                           1




                                                                       
                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY 
                              BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                               
                             WRIT PETITION NO.5177 OF 2015 

              Nitin Ashruba Tidke,  




                                              
              Age 33 Years, Occu. Service,  
              R/o.Bhogalwadi, Taluka Dharura,  
              District Beed.                    PETITIONER 

                       VERSUS 




                                      
              1]       The State of Maharashtra,  
                             
                       Through its Secretary,  
                       Department of Rural & Water Conservation, 
                       Mantralaya, Mumbai 
                            
              2]       Zilla Parishad, Beed 
                       Through its Chief Executive Officer 

              3]       Zilla Parishad, Gondia 
      


                       Through its Chief Executive Officer 
   



              4]       Block Education Officer,  
                       Panchayat Samiti, Wadwani,  
                       District Beed 





              5]       Education Officer [Primary],  
                       Zilla Parishad, Beed,  
                       Taluka and District Beed    RESPONDENTS

                                     ...





              Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner 
              Mr.A.V.Deshmukh, AGP for Respondent No.1 
              Mr.S.S.Dambe,   Advocate   for   Respondent   Nos.2, 
              4 and 5.  
                                     ...
                              CORAM:  S.S.SHINDE & 
                                       SANGITRAO S.PATIL,JJ. 

Reserved on : 15.06.2016 Pronounced on : 23.06.2016

5177.2015WP.odt

JUDGMENT: [Per S.S.Shinde, J.]:

This Petition is filed with the

following prayer:

B] By issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or

may kindly be directed to get Petitioner joined as an Assistant

Teacher [Primary] in view of the order dated 30.08.2014 issued by Respondent No.2 [Exhibit-B].

2] The learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner submits that the petitioner

was appointed as an Assistant Teacher

[Primary], on the establishment of respondent

no. 3 on 26th December, 2003. Since place

'Gondia' is far away from 'Beed', the

petitioner submitted an application with

respondent nos.2 and 3 for his inter-District

transfer from the establishment of respondent

no.3 to the establishment of respondent no.2.

5177.2015WP.odt

After considering the application of the

petitioner, respondent no.3 consented for

inter-District transfer of the petitioner, by

communication dated 16th August, 2014.

Respondent no.2 also granted a permission for

transfer of the petitioner from Gondia to

Beed, and directed his absorption on the

establishment of the Panchayat Samiti,

Wadwani, by his communication / order dated

30th August, 2014. However, the authorities

of respondent no.3 did not relieve the

petitioner immediately. On 9th April, 2015,

the petitioner was relieved by the Headmaster

of the Zilla Parishad Primary School,

Jabbarkheda, District Gondia. On 10th April,

2015, the petitioner reported at the office

of respondent no.4 in order to join duties.

However, respondent no.4 communicated

respondent no.5 that due to problem of

absorption of surplus teachers, the

petitioner could not be permitted to join

5177.2015WP.odt

duties. Thereafter, the petitioner approached

the office of respondent nos.2 and 5 and

requested them to permit him to join duties,

however, the petitioner was not allowed to

join duties. Hence this Petition.

3] The learned counsel appearing for

the petitioner further submits that when the

Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad,

Beed, and that of Gondia had consented and

permitted inter-District transfer, respondent

no.4 should have allowed the petitioner to

join at Wadwani. He submits that since the

petitioner is relieved from the earlier

establishment, he is without any work. He is

not getting salary. Therefore, relying upon

the pleadings in the Petition, annexures

thereto, and in particular the orders issued

by the Zilla Parishad, Gondia and Zilla

Parishad, Beed, the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that, the Petition may be

allowed.

5177.2015WP.odt

4] The learned counsel appearing for

respondent nos.2, 4 and 5 relying upon

the affidavit-in-reply submits that though

there were no vacant posts and further there

was problem of excess / surplus teachers in

Zilla Parishad, Beed, the then Chief

Executive Officer approved the proposals for

inter-District transfers of Vasti School

teachers. Therefore, enquiry was conducted

against the then Chief Executive Officer and

about regularization of employees in Zilla

Parishad, Beed, certain guidelines were

issued by the State, vide Government

Resolution dated 27th November, 2015. He

further submits that the Chief Executive

Officer, Zilla Parishad, Beed communicated to

all Zilla Parishads in Maharashtra, by letter

dated 29th November, 2014 that as there was a

problem of salary of teachers due to excess

teachers in Beed Zilla Parishad, they should

5177.2015WP.odt

not relieve any teachers for joining on the

establishment of Zilla Parishad, Beed, even

if they received any order of inter District

transfer from Zilla Parishad, Beed.

5] The learned counsel then submits

that the petitioner belongs to NT [D]

category, and as per the roster maintained by

the respondent Zilla Parishad, Beed there is

no vacancy available to accommodate the

petitioner on the same roster point as well

there was no vacancy from open category.

There were already about 384 NT [D] category

candidates in excess than the posts reserved

for NT [D] category in Zilla Parishad, Beed.

The petitioner was relieved after the

communication by respondent no.2 [i.e. Zilla

Parishad, Beed]. Since there was no post

available for accommodating the petitioner,

he has not been allowed to join at Zilla

Parishad, Beed, till today. Therefore, the

learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.

5177.2015WP.odt

2, 4 and 5 submits that the Petition may be

rejected.

6] Respondent no. 3 has also filed

affidavit-in-reply. It is stated in the said

affidavit-in-reply that respondent no.2

granted no objection in favour of the

petitioner with condition that the petitioner

would be relieved after completion of the

academic session; and after verifying whether

any departmental proceedings are proposed or

pending against the petitioner, and no dues

of the Zilla Parishad, Gondia are to be

recovered from him. Accordingly, after

verifying the aforesaid factors, he was

relieved on 9th April, 2015 and therefore, it

is prayed that the Petition being without any

substance, the same may be rejected.

7] We have given careful consideration

to the submissions of the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner and the learned

5177.2015WP.odt

counsel appearing for the respective

respondents. On perusal of the documents at

Exhibit-B Page-13 i.e. the order issued by

the Education Department, Zilla Parishad,

Beed, the name of the petitioner is mentioned

in the said order and his place of joining is

shown as Panchayat Samiti, Wadwani. The said

order was issued on 30th August, 2014.

However, respondent nos.2, 4 and 5 have

placed on record the copy of the Government

Resolution dated 27th November, 2015, issued

by the School Education and Sports

Department, Government of Maharashtra,

wherein it is stated that already there were

surplus teachers in the Beed District, and in

order to accommodate those surplus teachers,

793 basic posts have been sanctioned. There

is also copy of the letter dated 29th

November, 2014 placed on record by the said

respondents addressed to the various Zilla

Parishads wherein it was communicated that

5177.2015WP.odt

though there were orders issued, giving

consent for inter-District transfers, those

employees should not be relieved and in case

such employees were relieved, those would be

sent back to the concerned Zilla Parishad.

8] Upon careful perusal of the

documents placed on record, it is clear that

though the consent was given by respondent

nos.2 and 3 for the inter-District transfer

in the month of August, 2014, the petitioner

was relieved in the month of April, 2015. It

further appears that by that time, there were

a number of surplus teachers on the role of

the Zilla Parishad, Beed, and in order to

absorb the said surplus teachers, some

additional posts were required to be

sanctioned by the State Government. Despite

receiving the letter dated 29th November,

2014, respondent no.3 relieved the petitioner

for joining the establishment of respondent

no.2.

5177.2015WP.odt

9] In the light of the discussion in

the foregoing paragraphs, we are not

convinced to issue mandatory directions to

respondent no.3 to allow the petitioner to

join as an Assistant Teacher [Primary], in

view of the order dated 30th August, 2014

issued by respondent no.2. However, we direct

respondent no.3 [i.e. Zilla Parishad, Gondia]

to allow the petitioner to rejoin as an

Assistant Teacher [Primary] on its

establishment and give him posting within its

jurisdiction. As stated above, in view of

the communication issued by the Zilla

Parishad, Beed, on 29th November, 2014, to all

the Chief Executive Officers of the Zilla

Parishads in Maharashtra, the petitioner

should not have been relieved from the

services of the Zilla Parishad, Gondia.

10] In that view of the matter, we hope

and expect that respondent no.3 will allow

5177.2015WP.odt

the petitioner to join as an Assistant

Teacher within three weeks from receiving the

copy of this order.

11] So far as the claim of the

petitioner for Beed District is concerned,

respondent no.3, keeping in view the length

of service of the petitioner and seniority,

if any, for inter-District transfer, consider

the request of the petitioner for transfer

from Gondia District to Beed District, as and

when the posts would be available in Beed

District.

12] The Writ Petition is partly allowed

on the above terms, and the same stands

disposed of accordingly.

                       Sd/-                      Sd/-
               [SANGITRAO S.PATIL]          [S.S.SHINDE]
                     JUDGE                     JUDGE  

              DDC





 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter