Bombay High Court
Syed Ayazuddin S/O Syed Aminoddin vs The State Fo Maharashtra, Dept. Of ... on 8 June, 2017
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp5941.13.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5941/2013
PETITIONER : Syed Ayazuddin s/o Syed Aminoddin,
aged about 46 years, Occ : Teacher,
R/o C/o Abdul Mobin Abdul Aziz,
Ganesh Nagar, Mughlaipura, Paratwada,
Tah. Achalpur, Distt. Amravati - 444 805.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1. The State of Maharashtra,
Department of School, Education and Sports,
Through its Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. Director of Education,
Maharashtra State, Pune.
3. Deputy Director of Education,
Amravati Division, Amravati.
4. The Education Officer,
(Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Amravati.
5. Municipal Council, Achalpur,
Through its Chief Executive Officer,
Achalpur, Tah. Achalpur, Distt. Amravati.
6. Prakash Sadashiv Gujar,
aged about 53 years, Occ : Service,
R/o Kandli Paratwada, Tah. Achalpur,
Distt. Amravati.
7. J.S. Sahariya, Secretary, Under Secretary,
Department of School Education & Sports,
Extension Bhawan, Mantralaya, Mumbai.
(Amendment as per Court order dt. 29/10/2013).
::: Uploaded on - 13/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 15/06/2017 00:20:09 :::
wp5941.13.odt
2
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri S.I. Jagirdar, Advocate for petitioner
Shri K.L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 4
Shri S.Y. Deopujari, Advocate for respondent no.5
Shri A.S. Kilor, Advocate for respondent no.6
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND
ARUN D. UPADHYE, JJ.
DATE : 08.06.2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of
the respondent no.7, dated 17.8.2013 deciding the matter between the
petitioner and the respondent no.6 in respect of their rival claim for
promotion to the post of Head in the Urdu Medium School run by the
respondent no.5 - Municipal Council.
The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the
School run by the Municipal Council after the respondent no.6 was
appointed and the respondent no.6 is admittedly senior to the petitioner.
Initially, the Municipal Council was running only one school in Achalpur
for the medium of instruction of Urdu, Hindi and Marathi. The Municipal
Council decided to run two schools in Achalpur, one for Hindi and
Marathi Medium and the other for Urdu Medium and the requisite
permission was also sought from the State Government. The State
Government, vide order dated 17.5.2004 granted permission to the
Municipal Council to bifurcate the school on certain conditions. One of
wp5941.13.odt
the conditions in the order permitting bifurcation was that despite the
bifurcation of the school, the appointment on the post of the Head in
either of the schools, i.e., Hindi and Marathi Medium School or Urdu
Medium School should be made by appointing the senior-most teacher in
the common seniority list. By accepting the conditions in the order dated
17.5.2004, the Municipal Council bifurcated these schools. In the year
2010, the Headmaster in the Urdu Medium School retired on attaining
the age of superannuation and the Municipal Council promoted the
respondent no.6 to the post of Headmaster in the Urdu Medium School as
admittedly he was the senior-most Assistant Teacher. However, the State
Government intervened in the matter and directed the Municipal Council
to promote the petitioner as the Head of the Urdu Medium School. Being
aggrieved by the said order, the respondent no.6 filed a writ petition that
was partly allowed by this Court and the State Government was directed
to take a fresh decision in the matter of appointment of the Head of the
Urdu Medium School after hearing the petitioner and the respondent
no.6. The State Government heard the respondent no.6 and the petitioner
and by the impugned order held that the respondent no.6 was entitled to
be promoted to the post of Headmaster of the Urdu Medium School. The
said order is impugned by the petitioner in the instant petition.
wp5941.13.odt
On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, it appears
that there is no merit in the claim of the petitioner for promotion to the
post of Headmaster of the Urdu Medium School. Admittedly, only one
School was run and administered by the Municipal Council in Achalpur
till the said school was bifurcated in the year 2004 with the permission of
the State Government. In the School that was run by the Municipal
Council till the year 2004, education was imparted in Urdu, Hindi and
Marathi Medium. In the year 2004 with the permission of the State
Government the School was bifurcated and a separate school for
imparting education in Urdu Medium was started. The petitioner claims
to be a teacher in Urdu Medium, whereas the respondent no.6 is eligible
for teaching in Hindi and Marathi Medium as well as the subjects of Hindi
and Marathi. It appears that while permitting the bifurcation by the order
dated 17.5.2004, the Municipal Council was informed that only the
senior-most teacher in the school could be appointed as a Head of the
Urdu Medium School. The petitioner was appointed on 25.7.1994,
whereas the respondent no.6 was appointed as early as on 31.7.1984. The
respondent no.6 is admittedly senior to the petitioner. The condition laid
down in the order of the State Government dated 17.5.2004 was binding
on the Municipal Council. Even otherwise, if we assume that there was no
bifurcation of the school, the petitioner would not have been entitled for
wp5941.13.odt
promotion at all as the respondent no.6 is the senior-most teacher. In the
seniority list of Assistant Teachers the respondent no.6 was placed at
serial no.1 whereas the respondent no.6 was placed at serial no.12.
Merely because the petitioner can impart the lessons to the students in
Urdu Medium, he cannot claim his appointment to the post of Head of the
Urdu Medium School as of a right. Nothing is pointed out on behalf of the
petitioner to show that the petitioner would have a right to be appointed
as a Head of the Urdu Medium School merely because he can impart
lessons in Urdu Medium, though he is admittedly junior to several
teachers that are working in the two schools. There is no infirmity in the
impugned order so as to interfere with the same in exercise of the writ
jurisdiction.
Since there is no merit in the writ petition, the writ petition
is dismissed with no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
