Bombay High Court
Gangadhar S/O Shambhaji ... vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 20 September, 2016
Bench: B.R. Gavai
1 wp4951.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.4951 OF 2016
1.Gangadhar s/o. Shambhaji Kunthaupade,
Aged about 51 years, Occ.Service
as Lab. Assistant, r/o. Chikhli
Camp, Tq. Pusad, District
Yavatmal.
2. Kishor s/o. Jayram Atram,
Aged about 46 years,
Occ. Service as Peon,
r/o. Chikhli Camp, Tq. Pusad,
District Yavatmal.
3. Santosh s/o. Dattatray Mitkare,
Aged about 41 years, Occ.
Lab. Assistant, r/o. Chikhli
Camp, Tq. Pusad, District
Yavatmal. .......... PETITIONERS
// VERSUS //
::: Uploaded on - 22/09/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 23/09/2016 00:51:01 :::
2 wp4951.16.odt
1.The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Social Welfare Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2.The Divisional Social Welfare
Officer, Amravati Division,
Amravati.
3.The District Social Welfare
Officer, Yavatmal, Distt.
Yavatmal. .......... RESPONDENTS
____________________________________________________________
Mr.R.N.Ghuge, Adv. for the Petitioners.
Mr.K.R.Lule, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.
____________________________________________________________
CORAM : B.R. GAVAI
AND
V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 20.9.2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. GAVAI, J) :
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard
by consent.
2. It is not in dispute that the facts in this petition
is similar with the facts in Writ Petition No.2358 of 2013
3 wp4951.16.odt
(Kiran Namdeo Shinde and Others .vs. The State of
Maharashtra and Others) decided by the Division Bench of
this Court at the Principal Seat at Mumbai on 23.9.2013
and in Writ Petition No.7256 of 2011 decided by the
Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad Bench by
Judgment and Order dt.2.12.2013.
3. In view of the aforesaid Judgments of this Court,
the present petition also deserves to be allowed.
4. 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 respondents shall scrutinize the cases of individual
petitioners within a period of six months, and extend the
4 wp4951.16.odt
benefits to such of the petitioners, who are found eligible,
as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of
four months from such scrutiny.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No
orders as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
[jaiswal]
5 wp4951.16.odt
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and
correct copy of original signed Judgment.
Uploaded by : Jaiswal, P.S. Uploaded on : 22.9.2016.
