Shabeena Bano Akhtar Hussain And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 752 Bom

                                       {1}
                                                                  wp 4882.16.odt

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 4882 of 2016


 1        Shabeena Bano Akhtar Hussain
          Age: 35 years, Occu: Service,
          R/o Chand Tara Chowk, Dhule
          Taluka and District Dhule


 2        Amera Bano Mohammad Sidique,
          Age: 28 years, Occu. Service,
          R/o Aksanagar, Vadjai Road,
          Dhule, Taluka & District Dhule                     Petitioners

          Versus


 1        The State of Maharashtra,
          Through the Secretary for
          Education & Sports Department,
          Mantralaya, Mumbai

 2        The Director of Education (Primary)
          Central Building, Pune


 3        The Education Officer (Primary),
          Zilla Parishad, Dhule


 4        The Young Boys Education &
          Industrial Circle, Aksanagar,
          Vadjai Road, Dhule
          Through its President / Secretary


 5        Jakariya Aghadi Urdu Primary School,
          Aksanagar, Vadjai Road,
          Dhule, through Its Head Master                        Respondents

Mr.P.V. Barde advocate for the petitioners

Mr. A.N. Sabnis h/f Mr. D.R. Jethliya advocate for respondent Nos.4 & 5

{2} wp 4882.16.odt

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & P.R. BORA, JJ (Date : 15TH March, 2017.)

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: R.M. BORDE, J)

1 Heard.

2 Rule. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up

for final decision at admission stage.

3 Proposal forwarded by respondent No.5 school to

respondent No.3, seeking approval of the appointment of the

petitioners has been turned down on the ground of failure of the

management and the school to accommodate surplus teachers. It

is recorded in the communication dated 28.12.2015 issued by the

Education Officer, Zilha Parishad, Dhule that, unless the surplus

teachers in Dhule district are accommodated, approval cannot be

accorded to the appointment of the petitioners.

4 The petitioners place reliance on the Judgment dated

7.1.2016 delivered by the division Bench of this Court in Writ

Petition(No.7806/15) presented by respondent No.4 institution

objecting to the condition in respect of accommodation of surplus

{3} wp 4882.16.odt

teachers insisted upon by the Education Officer. While disposing

of the petition presented by respondent No.4 institution, it has

been held by the Division Bench that, the condition warranting

the minority institution to accommodate surplus teachers cannot

be insisted upon, since such an insistence affects the freedom

available to the minority institution in view of Article 30(1) of the

Constitution of India.

5 In view of the decision rendered by the Division Bench of

this Court in a petition presented by respondent No.4, the order

impugned in the instant petition issued by the Education Officer

dated 28.12.2015 does not sustain and deserves to be quashed

and set aside and same is accordingly quashed and set aside. The

Education Officer is directed to consider the proposal for according

approval to the appointment of the petitioners, in accordance with

provisions of law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably

within a period of three months from today.

 6        Rule is accordingly made absolute.

 7        There shall be no order as to costs.



                (P.R. BORA, J)                    (R.M. BORDE, J)

 vbd