Bombay High Court
Gokul Bhalerao Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 September, 2017
Bench: R.M. Borde
{1}
wp862017.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8620 OF 2017
Gokul s/o Bhalerao Patil
Age 43 years, occ. service
r/o Plot No. 18, Shankar Nagar
Pimple Road, Amalner, Tq. Amalner
Dist. Jalgaon Petitioner
Versus
1 The State of Maharashtra
Secretary, School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.
2 The Education Officer (Secondary)
Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon
3 Madhayamik Vidhyalaya,
Dodhwad
Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
Through its Head Master
4 Kranti Jyoti Savitribai Phule
Municipal High School,
Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
Through its Head Master / Mistress
5 Shivaji Shikshan Prasarak Mandal
Chichol, Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
Through its Secretary Respondents
Ms. Surekha P. Mahajan, advocate for petitioner.
Mr. A.R. Kale, AGP for respondents 1 and 2.
Mr. M.S. Deshmukh, advocate for respondent no. 4.
Respondents No.3 & 5 are served.
::: Uploaded on - 12/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 13/09/2017 01:29:36 :::
{2}
wp862017.odt
CORAM : R.M.BORDE AND
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, JJ.
DATE : 07th September, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT : ( Per R. M. Borde, J.)
1 Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and
heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.
2 The petitioner - Assistant teacher, who was initially
serving in the school operated by Respondent No.3-Institution, was
declared surplus and as such he was absorbed in the school
operated by Respondent No.4. On noticing availability of vacancy
in the original school i.e. Respondent No.3, petitioner made a
request for repatriation to Respondent No.3-school. The
application tendered by the petitioner was considered favourably by
the Education Department and order of repatriation came to be
issued by the Education Officer, (Secondary), Zilla Parishad,
Jalgaon, on 24th April, 2017. Respondent No.3 was directed to
permit the petitioner to resume duties as an Assistant teacher in
Respondent No.3-school against available vacancy. Respondent
No.3, however, did not obey the order issued by the Education
Officer and as such, the petitioner is compelled to approach this
Court seeking direction against Respondent No.3 as well as against
the Education Officer to permit him to resume duties as an
Assistant Teacher in Respondent No.3-school. It is also stated by
the petitioner that he has already been relieved from Respondent
No.4-school with a view to facilitate petitioner's joining in
Respondent No.3-school on 10.07.2017.
3 In spite of service of notice, Respondents No.3 and 5
{3}
wp862017.odt
have not caused appearance.
4 An affidavit-in-reply has been tendered on behalf of the
Education Officer and in paragraphs no.5 and 6 of the reply, it is
stated thus:
5 I say and submit that, the Respondent
No.2 again absorbed the Petitioner in Municipal
Council School at Chopada and the petitioner
joined at Chopada. As per request letter of
Petitioner dated 30.07.2016, the Respondent
No.2 Education Officer (Sec.), Zilla Parishad
Jalgaon issued order dated 24.04.2017 to
Respondent No.3, stating in said letter as one
post of Assistant Teachers was created in the
schedule for the year 2015-16 and therefore the
petitioner has requested to absorb him at his
original school at Dodhawad, Tal. Amalner. The
Respondent No.2 considered the request of the
petitioner and ordered to the Respondent No.3
to join the petitioner. The Respondent No.4
relieved the petitioner to join at Respondent
No.3 school on dated 10.07.2017. But the
Respondent No.3 school has not allowed to join
to the petitioner.
6 I say and submit that as per provision
made in M.E.P.S. Rules 1981 under Rule 26(3)
and 26(6), the Respondent No.3 is bound to join
the petitioner at his original appointed school at
Dodhavad, Tal. Amalner, District Jalgaon, as
per directions issued by the Respondent No.2
Education Officer (Sec.), Z.P., Jalgaon.
5 In view of the explanation tendered by the Education
Officer, Zilla Parishad, a direction needs to be issued to
Respondent No.3 to permit the petitioner to resume duties as an
Assistant Teacher in the school. In the event of failure of
{4}
wp862017.odt
Respondent No.3 to abide by the direction, it would be appropriate
for the Education Officer to take action against the concerned
management and school.
6 The petitioner contends that though he has been
relieved on 10.07.2017, he has not been permitted to resume duties
by Respondent No.3 and as such, he has not been paid monthly
salary since then.
7 It would be open for the petitioner to make appropriate
application to the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad,
Jalgaon, in that regard and the Education Officer shall issue
necessary instructions to the concerned. It would be open for the
Education Officer to deduct the amount of grants payable to
Respondent No.3 institution and to disburse the amount due to
the petitioner in the event of failure of Respondents No.3 and 5 to
abide by the directions.
8 Writ Petition is, thus, allowed. Respondents No.3 and
5 are directed to permit the petitioner to resume duties as an
Assistant Teacher in Respondent No.3 school within a period of
four weeks from today.
9 Rule is accordingly made absolute. There shall be no
order as to costs.
SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI R.M.BORDE
JUDGE JUDGE
adb/wp862017
