Bombay High Court
Shila Bhaskar Narkhede vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 31 August, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, R. N. Laddha
(1) 921-wp-9610-2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
921 WRIT PETITION NO.9610 OF 2021
SHILA BHASKAR NARKHEDE ..PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS PRINCIPAL
SECRETARY AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS
...
Mr. Jitendra V. Patil, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. P. K. Lakhotiya, AGP for Respondents-State.
Mr. N. E. Deshmukh, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
DATED : 31st AUGUST, 2021.
PER COURT:-
1. The petitioner is transferred from unaided
to aided post.
2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has
placed on record the chart showing the date of
initial appointment on unaided post, the date of
approval to the appointment on unaided post, the
date of transfer to the aided post and the approval
granted to the transfer on the unaided post. The
same is reproduced hereunder:
Sr. Writ Name of the Date of Date of How Many Transfer Name of
No. Petition Petitioner/ Appointmen Approval Years Date from the
No. Employee t on Un- on unaided Worked on Un-Aided to authority
Aided post Un-Aided Aided granted
Basis Basis Approval/o
rder to
transfer
on 20%
grant in
aid
instead of
100%
1. WP/ Shila 20/06/2011 09/03/2015 9 years 01/12/2020 Order
9610/202 Bhaskar (Page (Page 5 months (Page passed by
1 Narkhede No.15) No.17) No.19) education
Officer
Secondary
(2) 921-wp-9610-2021
dated
20/05/2021
(Page
No.18) as
well as
order
passed by
Dy.
Director
of
Education
dated
14/06/2021
(page
no.22 &
23)
3. It is submitted that in this matter, the
petitioner has worked on unaided post for four
years and more.
4. We have in our judgment dated 4.7.2019 in
Writ Petition No. 1493 of 2018 with connected Writ
Petitions held that some of the clauses of the
Circular dated 28.6.2016 do not apply. It appears
that the Education Officer, while granting approval
to the appointment of petitioner as an Assistant
Teacher from the date of transfer to the aided
posts had granted approval on grant-in-aid in
phase-wise manner to the effect that after five
years, the petitioner would be granted approval on
20% grant-in-aid. The same would not be in tune
with the order passed by this Court from time to
time at this Bench and also at principal seat.
5. In case the petitioner is transferred on
100% grant-in-aid post since the date of completion
of three years, the petitioner shall be considered
on 100% grant-in-aid posts. In case the petitioner
(3) 921-wp-9610-2021
is transferred on grant-in-aid posts, for example
on 60%, then from the date of transfer, she would
be on 60% grant-in-aid posts, but if the
petitioner, after having completed three years on
unaided post and are transferred on 100% grant-in-
aid posts, her service will have to be considered
on 100% grant-in-post. This aspect has been ignored
by the Director of Education / Dy. Director of
Education / Education Officer.
6. In light of above, the impugned order of
granting approval in phase-wise manner is quashed
and set aside and modified.
7. In case the Director of Education / Dy.
Director of Education / Education Officer are
satisfied about approval to the transfer of the
petitioner on aided post and if the petitioner has
completed three years and more on unaided post
before she is transferred to aided posts on 100%
grant-in-aid post, then respondents - Director of
Education / Dy. Director of Education / Education
Officer shall consider grant of approval to the
transfer of the petitioner on 100% grant-in-aid
posts within a period of six months.
8. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs
(R. N. LADDHA) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
JUDGE JUDGE
(4) 921-wp-9610-2021
Devendra/August-2021
