Pandurang Pundlikrao Nimbalkar ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2255 Bom

                                  (1)                        29-wp-3209-2022




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      WRIT PETITION NO.3209 OF 2022

 1.       Pandurang s/o Pundlikrao Nimbalkar,
          Age 47 years, Occu. Peon.

 2.       Bhaurao s/o Damaji Rathod,
          Age 53 years, Occu. Lab. Asst.,

          Both R/o Secondary Ashram School, Waghala,
          Tq. & Dist. Nanded.
                                          ..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.

 2.       The Director,
          Other Backward Bahujan Welfare,
          Directorate, State of Maharashtra,
          Pune-01.

 3.       The Regional Deputy Commissioner,
          Social Welfare Department, Latur,
          Division Latur.

 4.   The Assistant Commissioner,
      Social Welfare, Department, Nanded,
      Dist. Nanded.                   ..Respondents
                         ...
 Mr. Dhanaji S. Kudle, Advocate for the Petitioners.
 Mr. S. P. Tiwari, AGP for Respondents-State.
                                        ...

                               CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                       S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATED : 07th MARCH, 2022.

(2) 29-wp-3209-2022

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J.):-

1. 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 2011 and other companion matters decided on 2 nd December 2013 as well as decision of the Division Bench at Mumbai in Writ Petition No.2358 of 2013 and other companion matters decided on 21 st 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 30-04-1998 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

(3) 29-wp-3209-2022

and preferably within a period of four months from such scrutiny.

5. Rule made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

   (S. G. DIGE)                      (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
          JUDGE                              JUDGE


 Devendra/March-2022