Nagar Shikshan Mandal, Sindi ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 6899 Bom

WP 865-2020                                   1          Judgment

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                    NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                 WRIT PETITION NO. 4928 OF 2021
1.   Nagar Shikshan Mandal, Sindi (Railway)
     Tq. Seloo, District Wardha,
     through its Secretary/ President.

2.   Matoshri Sitabai Talatule Primary School,
     Sindi (Railway)
     Tq. Seloo, District Wardha,
     through its Headmaster.

3.   Ku. Archana Pandurang Mude,
     aged 42 years, Occ. Service.

4.   Ku. Iti Hariprasad Paliwal,
     aged 43 years, Occ. Service.

5.   Shri Sunil Arun Masram,
     aged 34 years, Occ. Service.

6.   Shri Tushar Domaji Lokhande,
     aged 34 years, Occ. Service.

     Petitioner Nos. 3 to 6 are resident
     C/o Matoshri Sitabai Talatule Primary School,
     Sindi (Railway), Tq. Seloo, District Wardha.
                                                      PETITIONERS
                               .....VERSUS.....
1.   State of Maharashtra,
     through its Secretary,
     Department of School Education
     and Sports, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

2.   Director of Education,
     Directorate (Primary Education),
     Maharashtra State, Pune.

3.   Deputy Director of Education,
     Nagpur Division, Nagpur.

4.   Education Officer (Primary),
     Zilla Parishad, Wardha.
                                                     RESPONDENTS
 WP 865-2020                                    2                         Judgment

               Shri N.S. Warulkar, Advocate for the petitioners.
          Shri D.P. Thakare, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 3/ State.
               Shri D.R. Bhoyar, Advocate for respondent No.4.


CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI - PHALKE, JJ.

DATE : 19TH JULY, 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

Counsel for the parties.

2. It is the case of petitioner No.1 - Education Society that

petitioner Nos. 3 to 6 were appointed at petitioner No.2 - School in the

years 2005, 2006 and 2012. Approval to the appointment of the said

petitioners was sought by submitting a proposal on 19/3/2021 to the

Education Officer (Primary). The said proposal has been rejected by the

Education Officer on 16/4/2021 by holding that in view of Government

Resolution dated 20/6/2018, it was found that the said petitioners had

not been appointed in accordance with law. On that count, the approval

was refused. Thereafter, on 7/6/2021, the Deputy Director of Education

refused to recommend the name of petitioner No.2 - School for receiving

grant-in-aid on the ground that there is no approval to the appointment of

the four teachers.

Being aggrieved, the petitioners have challenged the aforesaid

orders.

WP 865-2020 3 Judgment

3. Prima facie, on considering the documents on record, it is

seen that while considering the proposal dated 19/3/2021, the Education

Officer (Primary) has sought to apply the provisions of Government

Resolution dated 20/6/2018. Since it is the case of the petitioners that

the appointments were made prior to coming into force of that

Government Resolution, their entitlement to approval ought to be

considered while considering the position as prevailing on the date of

appointment. It is also clear that the approval has been refused without

granting any opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

4. In these facts, the interests of justice would be served by

directing the Education Officer (Primary) to re-consider the proposal

dated 19/3/2021 by granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners.

If the Education Officer seeks any further information/ clarification from

the petitioners, they would be in a position to supply the same. The

question with regard to the entitlement to grant-in-aid can be considered

thereafter.

5. In view of aforesaid, the following order is passed :

i. The order dated 16/4/2021 passed by the Education Officer

(Primary) is set aside. He is directed to re-consider the proposal dated

19/3/2021 in accordance with law.

                          WP 865-2020                                4                     Judgment

                         ii.        Depending upon the outcome of that proposal, the Deputy

Director of Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpur is free to consider the

claim of petitioner No.2 - School for release of grants in accordance with

law.

iii. To facilitate consideration of the proposal dated 19/3/2021,

the petitioners shall appear before the Education Officer (Primary) on

1/8/2022. The decision thereon be taken within a period of four weeks

from that date.

iv. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

(URMILA JOSHI - PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

SUMIT

Digitally signed bySUMIT CHETAN AGRAWAL Signing Date:20.07.2022 10:52