Dhanraj S/O Pralhad Sadanshiv And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 577 Bom

WP   6266/17                                      1                          Judgment

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                  NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                       WRIT PETITION No. 6266/2017
1.    Dhanraj S/o Pralhad Sadanshiv,
      Aged : 51 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Yashodharadevi Adiwasi Anudanit
      Ashram Shala, Gilbili, Tah. Ballarpur,
      District Chandrapur
2.    Siddharth Kawduji Bhasme,
      Aged : 52 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Yashodharadevi Adiwasi Anudanit
      Ashram Shala, Gilbili, Tah. Ballarpur,
      District Chandrapur.
3.    Tulshiram Uddhav Irdande,
      Aged : 50 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Shivaji Ashram School Subai,
      Tah. Rajura, District Chandrapur.
4.    Santosh S/o Namdeo More,
      Aged : 50 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Shivaji Ashram School Subai,
      Tah. Rajura, District Chandrapur.
5.    Rameshwar Daji Rahele,
      Aged : 51 years, Occ. Assistant,
      C/o. Swantravir Sawarkar Primary
      Anudanit Ashram School Durgapur,
      Post Urja Nagar, Tah. and District Chandrapur.
6.    Suresh Dadaji Wararkar,
      Aged : 52 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Primary Adiwasi Ashram School, Kodepur,
      Tah. Jivati, District Chandrapur.
7.    Chandu Parasram Lodhe,
      Aged : 45 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,
      C/o. Shri Maharshi Vya Primary Ashram
      School, Delanwadi, Tah. Sindewahi
      District Chandrapur.                                             PETITIONERS
                                   .....VERSUS.....
1.    The State of Maharashtra,
      through its Secretary,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2.    The Additional Commissioner,
      Tribal Development, Nagpur Division,
      Nagpur.
3.    The Project Officer,
      Integrated Tribal Development Project,
      Chandrapur, Distt. Chandrapur.                                      RESPONDENTS



 ::: Uploaded on - 25/01/2018                            ::: Downloaded on - 26/01/2018 00:47:42 :::
 WP   6266/17                                         2                           Judgment


                      Shri R.N. Ghuge, Counsel for the petitioners.
         Shri A.S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

                                      CORAM :SMT.VASANTI  A  NAIK AND
                                                     A.D. UPADHYE, JJ.                  

DATE : 17 TH JANUARY, 2018.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard

finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel

for the parties.

2. By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the

respondents to grant the scale of trained teacher to the petitioners from

the date of their initial appointment. The petitioners seek a direction to

the respondents to pay the consequential benefits to the petitioners as

early as possible.

3. The petitioners had secured the B.P.Ed. Qualification and

were appointed as Primary Teachers in the Ashram Schools, after

following the due procedure. The services of all the petitioners are said

to have been approved by the Education Authorities. While in service, the

petitioners secured the D.Ed. Training Qualification. According to the

petitioners, as the petitioners were appointed on the basis of B.P.Ed.

Qualification which they possessed at the relevant time, in view of the

judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and several judgments of this

WP 6266/17 3 Judgment

Court, the petitioners are entitled to the scale of 'Trained Teachers' from

the date of their initial appointment. It is stated that the consequential

benefits should be released in favour of the petitioners as a result of the

grant of the scale of trained teachers to the petitioners from the date of

their initial appointment. It is stated that the issue involved in this case

was also involved in the cases in the judgments annexed to the writ

petition as also the judgment dated 04.02.2016 in Writ Petition No.6355

of 2014 rendered by the Aurangabad Bench of this Court.

4. Shri Fulzele, the learned Additional Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the respondents, does not dispute that the issue

involved in this case was also involved in the decisions annexed to the

writ petition as also the judgment dated 04.02.2016 in Writ Petition

No.6355 of 2014. It is stated that an appropriate order may be passed in

the circumstances of the case.

5. On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a

perusal of the judgments annexed to the writ petition as also the

judgment dated 04.02.2016 in Writ Petition No.6355 of 2014, it appears

that the relief sought by the petitioners needs to be granted. The issue

involved in this case stands answered in favour of the petitioners by the

judgments annexed to the writ petition and by the aforesaid judgment

dated 04.02.2016.

WP 6266/17 4 Judgment

6. Hence, for the reasons recorded in the judgment

dated 03.02.2015 in Writ Petition No.3504 of 2014, the judgment

dated 12.03.2008 in Writ Petition Nos.6437 of 2007 and 1154 of 2008,

and the judgment dated 04.02.2016 in Writ Petition No.6355 of 2014, we

allow this writ petition. The respondents are directed to grant the pay-

scale of 'Trained Primary Teacher' (D.Ed.), to the petitioners from the

date of their initial appointment. The difference of arrears of salary

should be paid to the petitioners as early as possible and preferably within

a period of six months from the date of this judgment.

Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as

to costs.

               JUDGE                                            JUDGE

APTE