Bombay High Court
Prakash Janku Ighe vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 13 October, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
WP 6608/15
- 1 -
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.6608/2015
Prakash S/o Janku Ighe,
Age:59 years, Occ.Retired,
R/o Takali Dhokeshwar,Tq.Parner,
Dist.Ahmednagar.
ig ..Petitioner..
Versus
1) The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2) The Education Officer (Sec.)
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar.
3) The Head Master,
New English School, Wasunde,
Tq.Parner, Dist.Ahmednagar.
...Respondents..
.....
Shri C.K. Shinde, Advocate for petitioner.
Smt.S.S. Raut, AGP for respondent nos.1 & 2.
Respondent no.3 served.
.....
CORAM: S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
K.L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE: 13.10.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) :
WP 6608/15
- 2 -
1] Heard learned counsel appearing for the parties.
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and with the
consent of learned counsel for the parties, the petition
is taken up for final disposal at this stage.
2] Learned counsel for the petitioner states that
the petitioner was promoted as Head Master in January,
2014. On attaining the age of superannuation, the
petitioner retired on 31.5.2015 while discharging his
functions as Head Master. The proposal was submitted
seeking approval to the appointment of petitioner as Head
Master. The same was rejected. The petitioner approached
this Court by filing Writ Petition No.3539/2014. This
Court disposed of the writ petition vide judgment and
order dated 12.1.2015 setting aside the order of the
Education Officer rejecting the proposal seeking approval
to the appointment of petitioner as Head Master and
directed the Education Officer to reconsider the same.
Again, the said proposal is rejected stating that there
is a backlog of scheduled tribe category.
3] Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that at the relevant time when the petitioner was
promoted, there was no eligible candidate from ST
WP 6608/15
- 3 -
category to be promoted as Head Master. The management
had also given an undertaking to the Education Officer
specifically stating that there are two persons who are
undergoing B.Ed. course and the moment they complete it,
the backlog would be filled in from ST category.
According to the learned counsel, according to the
provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private
Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, p;reference is
required to be given to in-service candidates for being
promoted as Head Master. The petitioner belongs to NTB
category. There is one post of Head Master for NTB
category, even as per the Roster approved by the
B.C.Cell.
4] According to the learned counsel for the
petitioner, one Mr.Madhe, who belongs to ST category has
been promoted as Head Master before retirement of the
petitioner. Even the said aspect has not been considered
by the authority in its correct perspective. The learned
counsel submits that at the relevant time, there was no
candidate qualified and eligible to be appointed as Head
Master from the ST category, the case of the petitioner
is required to be considered and the petitioner is
WP 6608/15
- 4 -
required to be paid salary as that of Head Master.
5] Learned counsel for the petitioner further
submits that even as per Rule 9(10)(b) of the MEPS Rules,
the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as Head
Master.
6] Learned AGP submits that the backlog from ST
category was never filled in. There was no impediment
for the management to fill in the said post from ST
category even by advertisement. The same was not done.
The Education Officer has considered the Roster approved
by the BC Cell. Said Roster specifically shows the
backlog of the post of Head Master from ST category. No
error has been committed by the Education Officer while
rejecting the proposal.
7] We have considered the submissions canvassed by
the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
8] From the Roster approved by the B.C. Cell, it
transpires that one post of Head Master from ST category
was vacant. The management runs eight schools as per the
petitioner. On the relevant date when the petitioner was
promoted as Head Master, there was not a single Assistant
Teacher qualified and eligible to be promoted as Head
WP 6608/15
- 5 -
Master from the ST category. The management has also
given an undertaking that two of the Assistant Teachers
are presently undergoing B.Ed. course and once then
complete it, the post from ST category would be filled
in.
9] It is also stated that one Mr.Madhe belongs to
ST category and before the petitioner attained the age of
superannuation, he was already promoted as Head Master.
This itself shows that the backlog of ST category
candidate for the post of Head Master on promotion of
Mr.Madhe did not exist. The said post was filled in. AT
least from the date Mr.Madhe was appointed as Head
Master, the case of the petitioner should have been
considered. It appears that the said fact was not
brought to the notice of the Education Officer and the
Education Officer only on the ground that the backlog of
ST category exists, has rejected the proposal seeking
approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Head
Master. Rule 9(10)(b) of the MEPS Rules also states that
if it is not possible to fill in the post of Head or
Assistant Head, for which a vacancy is reserved for a
person belonging to the caste and tribes specified in
WP 6608/15
- 6 -
Clause (a), the post may be filled in by promoting a
candidate from other remaining category in the order
specified in Clause (a). In Clause (a), after the post
meant for scheduled tribe category, the post is meant for
de-notified tribe and nomadic tribe (B). The said aspect
also could have been considered by the Education Officer
while passing the impugned order.
10] Though the respondent no.3 is served, none
appears for the respondent no.3 to clarify as to when
Mr.Madhe was appointed as Head Master belonging to ST
category. However, all these aspects were not before the
Education Officer while the proposal is rejected.
11] Considering the above, the impugned order is
quashed and set aside. The Education Officer
(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar, shall reconsider
the proposal and also shall consider the subsequent
developments of filling in the post of Head Master from
the ST category and shall pass orders afresh. The
petitioner shall bring all these facts to the notice of
the Education Officer and shall appear before the
Education Officer on 27.10.2016. The Education Officer
shall thereafter within a period of three months take
WP 6608/15
- 7 -
decision on the said proposal afresh considering all the
aforesaid aspects of the matter. Rule is made absolute
in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(K.L. WADANE, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
ndk/c1310164.doc
