Bombay High Court
Kishor Walsing Patil And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 9 March, 2021
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant Dattatray Kulkarni
1 946-WP-4224-2021.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
946 WRIT PETITION NO. 4224 OF 2021
1. Kishor s/o Walsing Patil
Age: 41 years, Occu. Kamathi,
R/o Secondary Ashram School
Varshi Tq. Shindkheda,
Dist. Dhule.
2. Satish s/o Sahebrao Patil
Age: 37 years, Occu. Peon,
R/o As above.
3. Krushna s/o Santosh Patil
Age: 32 years, Occu. Lab. Attendent,
R/o As above.
4. Dinesh s/o Dharamsing Patil
Age: 33 years, Occu. Peon,
R/o As above.
5. Smt. Savitri Kalshya Naik
Age: 34 years, Occu. Cook,
R/o As above.
6. Deepak s/o Waman Patil
Age: 34 years, Occ. Clerk,
R/o As above.
7. Ghanshyam s/o Pandit Patil
Age: 35 years, Occu. Peon,
R/o As above. ... Petitioners
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through it's Secretary,
Other Backward Bahujan Welfare,
Department 1st Floor, Vistar,
Vistar Bhawan, Hutatma Rajguru,
Chowk, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 31/08/2021 23:03:56 :::
2 946-WP-4224-2021.odt
2. The Director,
Other Backward Bahujan Welfare,
Directorate, State of Maharashtra,
Pune-01.
3. The Regional Deputy Commissioner,
Social Welfare Department, Latur,
Division Nashik.
4. The Assistant Commissioner,
Social Welfare, Department, Dhule
District: Dhule. ... Respondents.
...
Mr. Kudle Dhanaji S., Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for the Respondents/State
...
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 9th March, 2021
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) :
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the
respective parties.
3. The issue raised in this petition is no more res integra and
is covered by the decision rendered by this Court in Writ Petition
No.7256 of 2012 and other companion matters decided on 2 nd
December, 2013 as well as decision of the Division Bench at Mumbai
3 946-WP-4224-2021.odt
in Writ Petition No.2358 of 2013 and other companion matters
decided on 21st September, 2013.
4. In the facts of this case and in view of the judgments
referred above, writ petition deserves to be allowed and the same is
accordingly allowed. Respondents are directed to examine the case of
each of the individual petitioners for deciding whether they satisfy the
criteria laid down under ACPS scheme applicable to private aided
government schools under the Government Resolution dated 30 th
April, 1998 as amended from time to time and if it is found that
petitioners are entitled to claim benefits under the scheme and they
satisfy the eligibility criteria, respondents shall extend the benefits to
them. Respondents shall scrutinize case of the individual petitioners
within a period of six months and extend the benefits to the eligible
petitioner as expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period
of four months from such scrutiny.
5. Rule made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
Sameer
