Bombay High Court
Anant Gunwantrao Sable Amravati vs The State Of Mah. Mumbai & 3 Others on 10 August, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1
wp1517.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.1517 of 2002
Anant s/o Gunwantrao Sable,
Aged about 28 years,
Occupation - Service,
Resident of Dahigaon Recha,
Tahsil Anjangaon Surji,
District Amravati. ... Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Department of Education,
Mantralaya, Madam Came Road,
Mumbai-400 032.
2. Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Amravati,
Tahsil and District Amravati.
3. Indira Gandhi School and
Junior College, Dahigaon Recha,
Tahsil Anjangaon Surji,
District Amravati,
through its President.
4. The Head Master,
Indira Gandhi School and
Junior College, Dahigaon Recha,
Tahsil Anjangaon Surji,
District Amravati. ...Respondents
Shri Adwait Manohar, Advocate for Petitioner.
Shri S.M. Ukey, Additional Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1
and 2.
::: Uploaded on - 21/08/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 23/08/2017 01:04:00 :::
2
wp1517.02.odt
Coram : R.K. Deshpande & Manish Pitale, JJ.
Dated : 10 August, 2017
th
Oral Judgment (Per R.K. Deshpande, J.) :
1. Heard the learned counsels appearing for the parties.
2. The approval to the appointment of the petitioner was
revoked by the Education Officer by an order dated 21-2-2002 on the
ground that before making appointment, the approval of the State
Government was not obtained. In the reply filed by the respondents,
the stand is taken that there was a ban on recruitment and, therefore,
without permission of the State Government, the recruitment was not
permissible.
3. Similar issue was involved in Writ Petition No.1280 of 2002
along with connected matter, decided on 30-5-2017; and Writ Petition
No.1345 of 2002, decided on 7-1-2016. This Court has allowed those
petitions and set aside the order dated 21-2-2002 revoking the order
of approval granted to the appointment of the petitioner. This Court
has restored the approval granted by the respondent No.2-Education
Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad. The Court has held that the ban
wp1517.02.odt
was not applicable, as it was not to the notice of the respondent No.2
while granting approval. The controversy is, therefore, covered by
both these decisions.
4. Apart from above, in the present matter, we find that the
petitioner was appointed in the manner prescribed under the
provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools
(Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977, more particularly
Section 5 therein. Before proceeding to effect recruitment, the
permission of the Education Officer was also obtained, as the post was
found to be sanctioned. It is not the ground stated by the respondent
2-Education Officer in the order impugned that there was any
deficiency in following the mandatory provisions of the said Act and
the Rules framed thereunder. The order of revocation of approval is
also passed without hearing the petitioner.
5. In view of above, we allow this petition. The impugned
order dated 21-2-2002 passed by the respondent No.2-Education
Officer, is hereby quashed and set aside, and the order
dated 27-9-2001 passed by the Education Officer is restored. The
petitioner is in service by virtue of the interim order passed by this
wp1517.02.odt
Court. Hence, the services of the petitioner shall be continued in
accordance with law.
6. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No order as to
costs.
JUDGE. JUDGE.
Lanjewar
