Chhaya Laxmanrao Pote vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors
2017 Latest Caselaw 3292 Bom

                                       1        WP 4604 of 2008

      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                          Writ Petition No.4604 of 2008

     *       Chhaya Laxmanrao Pote,
             Age 37 years,
             Occupation: Service,
             R/o Jambhala, Taluka Hadgaon,
             District Nanded.                          ..    Petitioner.

                      Versus

     1)      The State of Maharashtra,
             Through Secretary,
             Tribal Development Department,
             Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.

     2)      The Commissioner,
             Tribal Development, MS Nasik.

     3)      Additional Commissioner,
             Tribal Development Amravati.

     4)      The Project Officer,
             Integrated Tribal Development
             Scheme, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded.

     5)      Ramaji Metkar Andh Adivasi
             Vidyarthi Vasatigruha, Tamsa,
             Through Head Master,
             Shri Guru Samarth Sant
             Rambapu Maharaj Adivasi
             Ashram Shala, Jambhala,
             Taluka Hadgaon, Dist Nanded.              .. Respondents.

                                ----
     Shri. S.B. Talekar, Advocate, for petitioner.

     Smt. P.V. Diggikar, Assistant Government Pleader, for
     respondent Nos.1 to 4.

                                       ----




::: Uploaded on - 20/06/2017                  ::: Downloaded on - 21/06/2017 00:33:04 :::
                                         2        WP 4604 of 2008

                                Coram:      T.V. NALAWADE &
                                            SANGITRAO S PATIL, JJ.

Date: 16 June 2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per T.V. Nalawade, J.):

The petition is filed only to challenge some

portion of the Government policy decision which can be

found in Government Resolution dated 25-9-2006 issued

by the Tribal Development Department of the

Government. Due to the conditions mentioned in that

Government Resolution, the petitioner will be entitled to

get salary of trained teacher from the date mentioned in

the Government Resolution. She was already terminated

prior to this policy decision as her appointment was not

as per the provisions and on the date of appointment she

was not holding necessary educational qualification, D.Ed.

She is claiming arrears of salary for the period from 1-5-

2002 to 30-9-2006 which is payable to trained teachers

and for that direction is sought.

2) It appears that that many similar cases were

considered by the State Government and ultimately a

sympathetic view was taken by the Government and the

3 WP 4604 of 2008

services of all such persons whose appointments were not

made properly and on the date of the appointment who

were not having necessary qualification are regularized

for Ashram Schools considering the necessity of teachers

in Ashram schools but that is subject to some conditions

mentioned in the decision. The condition is that only from

the date of appointment the services were regularized and

they will not be entitled to get arrears of salary. Salary

was made payable from 1-10-2006 but the petitioner is

claiming salary for the period 1-5-2002 to 30-9-2006.

Other similarly placed teachers are not getting that

benefit but the petitioner is claiming that benefit. It can

be said that already sympathetic view is taken by the

Government and subject to some conditions the services

of the petitioner are regularized. Nothing more could have

been done by the Government and this Court sees no

reason to interfere in the aforesaid policy decision taken

by the Government. The petition stands dismissed. Rule

discharged.

             Sd/-                                Sd/-
     (SANGITRAO S PATIL, J.)            (T.V. NALAWADE, J.)

     rsl