Bombay High Court
Smt. Snehlata Shrirang Ukirde vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 12 March, 2021
Bench: S.C. Gupte, Surendra Pandharinath Tavade
Aarti G. WP.1534.2019 a.w WP.519.2021.doc
Palkar
Digitally signed IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
by Aarti G. Palkar CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Date: 2021.03.17
10:44:45 +0530
WRIT PETITION NO. 1534 OF 2019
Smt. Snehlata Shrirang Ukirde ....Petitioner
vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 519 OF 2021
Ms Swati Bharatrao Pawar ....Petitioner
vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
.......
Mr. Narendra Bandiwadekar a/w Mr. Vinayak Kumbhar i/b Ms Ashwini
Navjyot Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners.
Mr. N. K. Rajpurohit, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 in WP/1534/2019.
Mr. A. B. Kadam, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in WP/519/2021.
CORAM : S. C. GUPTE AND SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.
DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS RESERVED: 2 FEBRUARY 2021
DATE ON WHICH JUDGMENT IS PRONOUNCED: 12 MARCH 2021
JUDGMENT (PER SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J.) :
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent of both counsel, the
Writ Petitions are taken up for fnal hearing.
2. The Petitioners seek direction to Respondent No. 2 to accept the
proposals of the Petitioners from Respondents-Institutions and grant
approval to their appointments in the post of Full Time Teacher in
Respondent No. 3 Institute, by way of up-gradation from the post of Part
Time Teachers.
R.V.Patil 1/4
WP.1534.2019 a.w WP.519.2021.doc
3. The Petitioners are qualifed and eligible for the appointment as a Full
Time Teachers. After following due procedure of law prescribed under the
Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools Act, 1977, Respondent No. 3
has appointed the Petitioners in its school as Shikshan Sevak, in the year
2008 / 2009. Respondent No. 2 granted approval to the appointment of the
Petitioners as part time Shikshan Sevak. There was increase in the
workload, and Full Time Posts became available. The Petitioners were
entitled to be appointed as Full Time Teachers. It is contended that the
posts of Full Time Teachers fell vacant on account of retirements/voluntary
retirements of existing teachers, therefore, the Petitioners requested
Respondent No. 3 to appoint them in the vacant posts of Full Time Teachers
by way of up-gradation, but Respondent No. 3 did not submit the proposals
of the Petitioners for up-gradation as Full Time Teachers. It is contended
that the Petitioners are eligible to be considered for up-gradation as Full
Time Teachers as per GRs of 2001 and 2005.
4. Heard learned Counsel on behalf of the Petitioners and Learned AGP
on behalf of the Respondents. It is not in dispute that the Petitioners came to
be appointed as Shikshan Sevaks in the year 2009 / 2008. The said
appointments were approved by Respondent No. 2. After completion of
three years service as Part Time Shikshan Sevak, the Petitioners became
eligible to be absorbed in regular cadre as Full Time Teacher. It is also an
admitted fact that the posts of Full Time Teachers are available in the
establishment of Respondent No. 3, due to retirements of existing teachers.
The Petitioners requested Respondent No. 3 to send their proposals to
Respondent No. 2 for approval, but Respondent No. 3 did not send
proposals of the Petitioners for the approval of the appointments as Full
Time Teachers.
5. Admittedly, Education Department has issued two GRs dated 31
January 2001 and 10 June 2005, wherein, there is a provision of up-
R.V.Patil 2/4
WP.1534.2019 a.w WP.519.2021.doc
gradation of Shikshan Sevak as Full Time Teachers on proper application
submitted in that behalf to the Education Authorities. The Educational
Institute is bound to submit the proposals of the Petitioners for their
approval as Full Time Teachers.
6. In a number of similarly placed cases, a Division Bench of this Court,
by its order dated 10 July 2019, whilst disposing of the Petitions of
concerned teachers, granted liberty to the Petitioners to make
representations and directed the Education authorities to issue appropriate
instructions/directions for facilitating their absorption in accordance with the
State policy in a time bound manner. This Court in the case of Ms Yashoda
Jaysing Karande V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. {WP(Stamp)
No. 96359 of 2020} has held that the Petitioners therein were entitled for
the beneft of the above mentioned two GRs for their appointments as Full
Time Teachers. In the present case also, the appointment of the Petitioners
as Shikshan Sevak is approved by Respondent No. 2. There are clear
vacancies in the cadre of Full Time Teachers; as per the seniority, the
Petitioners are entitled to be appointed as Full Time Teachers. In view of the
GRs of 2001 and 2005, coupled with the decisions of a Division Bench of
this Court, these petitions can be disposed of by giving liberty to the
Petitioners to fle appropriate applications/representations for their
absorption as Full Time Teachers in accordance with the State policy. The
Deputy Director of Education, shall on receipt of such applications/
representations extend opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners and the
concerned Institutions thereafter issue necessary instructions/directions for
facilitating absorption of the Petitioners in accordance with the policy of the
Respondent-State, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a
period of six weeks from the date of receipt of the
applications/representations. In the event the Petitioners are found eligible
for absorption as Full Time Assistant Teachers in the concerned private
institutions, the Deputy Director of Education, shall issue directions to the
R.V.Patil 3/4
WP.1534.2019 a.w WP.519.2021.doc
employer Institution for submitting appropriate proposals for grant of
approval to upgradation of the Petitioners as Full Time Teachers,
Accordingly, in view of the aforesaid directions, the petitions are disposed of.
(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J) (S.C. GUPTE, J.)
R.V.Patil 4/4
