Data Minority Education And ... vs Education Officer (Secondary) ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5921 Bom

WP 7710-19                                      1                    Judgment

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                    WRIT PETITION NO. 7710/2019

1.    Data Minority Education & Welfare
      Organization, Akola, Registration No.F-8880,
      through its Secretary, Zulfikar Nagar,
      Dabki Road, Old City, Akola.

2.    Taj Urdu High School, Agar Base,
      Old City, Akola, through the Headmaster.

3.    Uzma Tajim wd/o Syed Nijazuddin,
      Aged about adult, Occupation : Service,
      Resident of Dahihand Base, Near Arbi
      Madarsa, Akola - 444 002.                                 PETITIONERS

                                  .....VERSUS.....

Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Akola.                                          RESPONDENT

                 Shri C.M. Samarth, counsel for the petitioners.
     Mrs. K.R. Deshpande, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent.


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

DATE : 27TH JUNE, 2022.

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

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioners are aggrieved by the communication dated

25.06.2019 issued by the Education Officer (Secondary) refusing to approve

the appointment of the petitioner no.3 on compassionate basis. The husband

of the petitioner no.3 was serving on the post of Peon at the petitioner no.2-

WP 7710-19 2 Judgment

School. He died in harness after which the petitioner no.3 was appointed on

that post on 01.09.2017. While seeking approval to such appointment, the

petitioner nos.1 and 2 put forth the case that the post on which the petitioner

no.3 was appointed was a sanctioned post and the same was lying vacant.

The Education Officer (Secondary) however has refused to grant approval on

the ground that there were no directions of the State Government to fill up

posts on compassionate basis and that there was no staff justification at the

Institution.

3. It is the specific case of the petitioners that for the year 2016-17,

two posts of Class-IV employees were sanctioned out of which one post was

vacant on which the petitioner no.3 came to be appointed. It is further

submitted that insofar as compassionate appointments are concerned, it

would not be necessary to obtain any directions from the State Government.

Hence, the approval in question was liable to be granted.

4. The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent by

relying upon the affidavit-in-reply submits that prior permission of the

Education Officer (Secondary) was not taken to make such appointment. The

petitioners did not take immediate steps to seek approval to the appointment

of the petitioner no.3. Since the post in question was not considered as a

sanctioned post the approval is rejected.

WP 7710-19 3 Judgment

5. It is seen from the documents placed on record and as asserted by

the petitioners that one sanctioned post of Class-IV employee was available for

accommodating the petitioner no.3. Insofar as the appointment on

compassionate basis is concerned, it would not be necessary to obtain

sanction of the State Government if a sanctioned post is lying vacant

considering various decisions of this Court in that regard. In these facts, we

find that the Education Officer (Secondary) could be directed to re-consider

the proposal forwarded by the petitioners seeking approval to the

appointment of the petitioner no.3. This could be done by granting an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and considering all relevant records.

6. Accordingly, the order dated 25.06.2019 is set aside. The

Education Officer (Secondary) is directed to re-consider the said proposal by

granting an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners. For such adjudication,

the petitioners shall attend the Office of the Education Officer (Secondary) on

06.07.2022. The decision on the said proposal be taken within a period of

four weeks from that date and communicated to the petitioners.

7. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs.

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

APTE

Signed By: Digitally signed byROHIT DATTATRAYA APTE Signing Date:29.06.2022 10:18