Bombay High Court
Shivaji Rambhau Pethe vs 4] The Headmaster on 19 December, 2017
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
1
lpa 206.10 judg.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
Writ Petition No.1368 of 2002
Shivaji Rambhau Pethe,
Aged about 27 years, Occ.-Service,
R/o.-Indira Nagar front side of Durga Vihara Nagar,
Tq. and District Amravati. .... Petitioner.
-Versus-
1] The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary of Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2] The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Amravati.
3] Late Meerabai Pethe Education Society
through it's President R/o.-Antora, Tq. and Distt. Amravati.
4] The Headmaster,
Daduji Pethe, Vidyalaya Antora,
Tq. and Distt. Amravati. .... Respondents.
None for petitioner.
Shri I.J. Damle, AGP for resp. no.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Coram : B.P. Dharmadhikari &
Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.
Date of Reserving Judgment : 14th December, 2017.
Date of Pronouncement : 19th December, 2017.
J U D G M E N T (Per Mrs. Swapna Joshi, J.)
By this petition, the petitioner seeks relief to set aside the
impugned communication dated 21-02-2002 issued by respondent
no.2-Education Officer (Secondary), Amravati and to restrain
lpa 206.10 judg.
respondent nos. 3 and 4 from terminating the services of the petitioner.
2] The brief facts of the case are that;
As per the requirement, respondent no.1-Education Officer
according to the divisions of classes and recommendations of
Chiplunkar Committee's report, granted permission to respondent
nos. 3 and 4 to fill up the post of 'Peon/Chaukidar' in the school of
respondent no.3. In view of sanction of post by the Education Officer,
the respondent nos.3 and 4 issued an advertisement in the
newspaper. The petitioner applied for the said post and was appointed
in the respondent no.4 school. Respondent no.1-Education Officer
granted approval to the post of petitioner. However, the Education
Officer by impugned communication dated 21-02-2002 cancelled his
earlier order of approval, on the ground that when the petitioner was
appointed, the State Government had imposed ban on the
appointments and therefore the petitioner could not have been
appointed.
3] Heard Shri Damle, the learned Assistant Government
Pleader for the State. The petitioner and his Advocate remained
absent. Shri Damle, the learned Assistant Government Pleader for the
State has failed to point out any irregularity or illegality in the
appointment of the petitioner.
4] This Court vide order dated 22-07-2002, protected the
services of the petitioner.
5] Except the fact that the State Government prohibited to fill
up the posts of non teaching staff in secondary schools, we do not find
anything adverse against the petitioner to cancel the approval granted
to him by respondent no.1-Education Officer.
6] In Writ Petition No. 1345 of 2002 (Dashrath Gajanan Bolke
vrs Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Amravati and others
and Writ Petition No.1280 of 2002 (Vilas Marotrao Rahate vrs State of
Maharashtra and others), the similar issue was dealt with and the
lpa 206.10 judg.
Education Officer was directed to restore his earlier order and grant
approval to the appointment of the petitioner.
7] In view of the facts and circumstances, the following order
is passed :-
ORDER
a) Writ Petition No.1368 of 2002 is allowed.
b) Impugned communication dated 21-02-2002 is
set aside.
c) The Education Officer is directed to restore his
earlier order granting approval to the
appointment of the petitioner.
d) Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Deshmukh
