Archana Dattatraya Kolewad And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 8207 Bom

                                            (1)                   wp6772.21.odt




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    15 WRIT PETITION NO.6772 OF 2021

            ARCHANA DATTATRAYA KOLEWAD AND ANOTHER
                             VERSUS
              THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Ms. S. L. Pansambal, Advocate h/f Mr. V. D. Gunale, Advocate for
the petitioners
Mr. P. N. Kutti, AGP for the respondent/State.


                                      CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                              M. G. SEWLIKAR, JJ.

DATED : 21-06-2021

PER COURT :-

1. Ms. Pansambal, learned counsel for the petitioners

submits that the petitioners are appointed on unaided posts on 1 st

July, 2013. Their services were also approved on the unaided posts.

Upon vacancy created on aided posts, the petitioners were

transferred to the aided posts with effect from 1 st December, 2020.

The Education Officer has accorded approval to the transfer of the

petitioners to the aided posts, however on 40% grant-in-aid instead

of 100% grant-in-aid. The reliance is placed by the Education Officer

on the circular dated 28/06/2016. The same is illegal.

2.             We       have        heard   the   learned     AGP        for      the

respondent/State.





                                       (2)                     wp6772.21.odt

3. It appears from the record that the petitioners are

appointed on unaided posts on 1st July, 2013. Their appointments

are approved initially for the probation period and subsequently

permanent approval is also granted. With effect from 1 st December,

2020 the petitioners are transferred to the aided post.

4. The petitioners have discharged their duties for more

than 7 years on unaided posts before being transferred to the aided

posts. This Court in Writ Petition No. 1493 of 2018 with connected

writ petitions under the judgment and order dated 04/07/2019 has

held that some of the clauses of circular dated 20/06/2016 are

illegal and are not in consonance with Rule 41 of the MEPS Rules.

5. In case the petitioners after rendering 7 years of service

are transferred to the 100% grant-in-aid posts, they deserve to be

granted approval on 100% grant-in-aid instead of 40% as granted

under the impugned order.

6. In light of that the impugned order is quashed and set

aside. Impugned order to the extent of granting approval on 40%

grant-in-aid is set aside.

(3) wp6772.21.odt

7. The Education Officer shall consider the 7 years service

rendered by the petitioners on unaided posts and if the petitioners

are transferred on 100% vacant grant-in-aid posts they should be

granted approval on 100% grant-in-aid post.

8. We have passed this order as approval has been granted

by the Education Officer to the transfer of the petitioners to the

aided posts meaning thereby that the Education Officer was

satisfied about the qualification, roaster and the seniority of the

petitioners.

9. The aforesaid exercise shall be done within four months.

10. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

     (M. G. SEWLIKAR)                          (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
          JUDGE                                         JUDGE




ssp/wp6772.21.odt