Shri. Nitin Dinkar Panchal vs The State Of Maharashtra Thru The ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 14686 Bom

                                                                 4-wp8166-19g.doc

vai

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                          CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION


                          WRIT PETITION NO.8166 OF 2019

      Nitin D.Panchal                                         ...Petitioner
                 V/s.
      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                         ...Respondents

                                      WITH
                          WRIT PETITION NO.1876 OF 2020

      Sushant P. Bhandare                                     ...Petitioner
                V/s.
      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                         ...Respondents


                                      WITH
                          WRIT PETITION NO.1318 OF 2020

      Gotu D. Gaikwad                                         ...Petitioner
                V/s.
      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                         ...Respondents



      Mr.Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioners in the above Writ Petitions.

      Mr.Narendra V. Bandiwadekar for the Intervenor.

      Mr.V.M. Mali, AGP with Ms.Sushma Bhende, AGP, Mrs.P.J.
      Gavhane, AGP, Mr.N.K. Rajpurohit, AGP, Mr.N.C. Walimbe, AGP,
      Ms.K.N. Solunke, AGP for the State - Respondent in the above Writ
      Petitions.

      Mr.Utkarsha S. Desai for the Respondent - Management.

                                      CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA &
                                              ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.

DATE : 7TH OCTOBER, 2021.

P.C. :-

4-wp8166-19g.doc

1. Rule. Learned counsel for the respondents waives service.

2. By Consent of the parties, the writ petitions are heard

finally.

3. By these petitions filed under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, the petitioners have impugned the orders dated

27th November, 2018, 28th January, 2019 and dated 1st January, 2019

passed by the Education Officer thereby rejecting the proposal

submitted by the Management for approval to the appointment of the

petitioners to the post of Shikshan Sevak.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and the

respondents. Mr.Bhavake, learned counsel for the petitioners invited

our attention to the judgment delivered by this Court on 10 th July,

2017 in Writ Petition No.8587 of 2016 filed by Smt.Munoli Rajashri

Karabasappa vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. along with other

connected writ petition. By the said judgment, this Court after

considering the Government Resolution and after adverting to the

judgment of this Court in Writ Petition Nos.10580 of 2015 with 1145

of 2016 decided on 9th March, 2017 held that the ban would not be

applicable to three categories, (1) where the recruitment process is

already commenced prior to Government Resolution dated 2nd May,

2012. (2) Insofar as the appointment made for the subjects of

English, Maths and Science are concerned (3) where the recruitment

4-wp8166-19g.doc

is made to fulfill the backlog of reserved category candidates. The

subjects involved in these three writ petitions are English, the

candidate belonged to Scheduled Tribe category and the subject

Marathi. Learned AGP could not distinguish the said judgment. In

our view, the said judgment squarely applies to the facts of this case.

We do not propose to take a different view in the matter. We

accordingly pass the following order :-

a). The above writ petitions are allowed. The impugned order

dated 27th November, 2018 in Writ Petition No.8166 of 2019, the

impugned order dated 29th January, 2019 in Writ Petition No.1318 of

2020 and the impugned order dated 1st January, 2019 in Writ Petition

No.1876 of 2020 are quashed and set aside.

b). The Education Officers are directed to examine the

individual cases and grant approval to each of the aforesaid teachers

who fall in any of the following three categories set out therein viz. :-

i). Where the recruitment process is already commenced

prior to the Government Resolution dated 2nd May, 2012;

ii). Where the appointments made for filling up vacancies in

English, Mathematics and Science;

iii). Where the recruitment is made to fulfill the backlog of

reserved category candidates.

c). The approval shall be granted within a period of six weeks

4-wp8166-19g.doc

from today.

d). It is made clear that upon grant of approval necessary

steps shall be taken by the Education Officer for paying salary to

such of the teachers who are found eligible and salaries would be

paid to them within a period of twelve weeks from today.

e).          Rule is made absolute accordingly.

f).          The Education Officer shall include the name of these

petitioners in the Shalarth ID within six weeks from today by

obtaining appropriate permission from the Deputy Director of

Education.

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.)                                 (R.D. DHANUKA, J.)