Bombay High Court
Rajendra Kondibhau Jagtap vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 20 October, 2022
Bench: V. V. Kankanwadi, Y. G. Khobragade
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
965 WRIT PETITION NO.9264 OF 2021
Rajendra Kondibhau Jagtap,
Age 41 yrs., Occ. Service,
R/o Pimpalgaon Rotha, Tq. Parner,
Dist. Ahmednagar.
... Petitioner
... Versus ...
1 The State of Maharashtra,
Through The Principal Secretary,
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2 The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar.
3 Bhausaheb Maharaj Shikshan
Prasarak Mandal, Vasunbe,
Tq. Parner, Ahmednagar,
Through it's Secretary.
... Respondents
...
Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. A.S. Shinde, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2
Mr. S.S. Wagh, Advocate for respondent No.3
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
Y.G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.
DATE : 20th OCTOBER, 2022
2 WP_9264_2021_Jd
JUDGMENT : [PER : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J.]
1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned Advocates
for the parties finally, by consent.
2 The petitioner was appointed as a Junior Clerk in the respondent
No.3 institution. He joined the said post on 01.02.2007. Thereafter, on
05.10.2007 the Education Officer had granted approval to his appointment as
Junior Clerk with effect from 01.02.2007. It appears that thereafter the
petitioner acquired the necessary qualification. It appears that he had
acquired the necessary qualification but then he came to be promoted to the
post of Assistant Teacher on 25.06.2020. Thereafter the management had
submitted the proposal on 02.07.2020 to the Education Officer for approval
to the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher. It came to be
rejected by respondent No.2 on 02.07.2021 on the ground that the
recruitment has not been done as per the Government Resolution dated
02.02.2012, 23.06.2017, 20.06.2018 as well as 04.05.2020. Hence, this
petition.
3 Heard learned Advocate Mr. S.T. Shelke for the petitioner,
learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Advocate Mr. S.S. Wagh
3 WP_9264_2021_Jd
for respondent No.3.
4 Learned Advocate for the petitioner has pointed out that there is
Government Resolution dated 10.06.2005, which speaks about the internal
promotion in Clause No.8, which runs thus -
"8½ f"k{kdsrj deZpk&;kus ek/;fed f"k{kdkalkBh ok dfu'B egkfon;ky;hu
f"k{kdkalkBh vko";d rh "kS{kf.kd vgZrk izkIr dsyh vkf.k tj R;k laoxkZps in
ek/;fed "kkGsr ok mPp ek/;fed "[email protected]'B egkfon;ky;kr miyC/k vlsy rj]
v"kk izdj.kh lnjgw f"k{kdsrj deZpk&;kl f"k{k.klsod Eg.kwup fu;qDrh n;koh ykxsy
o R;kauk f"{k.klsodkapsp eku/ku vkf.k brj loZ vVh o "krhZ ykxw gksrhy- ek= v"kk
f"k{kdsrj deZpk&;kph iwohZph lsok gh lsokfuo`Rrh osruklkBh xzkg; /kjrk ;sbZy-"
He also pointed out that it appears that the respondent No.2 had
not considered this resolution before rejecting the proposal.
5 Learned AGP has taken us through the Government Resolutions,
those have been referred in the impugned order. However, the above said
clause in the Government Resolution dated 10.06.2005 has not been
addressed by the respondent No.2. Under such circumstance, this is
appropriate case to relegate matter back to respondent No.2 to consider the
proposal in the tune of said Government Resolution dated 10.06.2005,
especially Clause No.8. We also observe that the Government Resolution
which has been brought to the notice of this Court dated 10.06.2005 is prior
4 WP_9264_2021_Jd
in time to the Government Resolutions those have been referred to in the
impugned order; yet in the said Government Resolutions, which have come
up subsequently, there is no clarification for Clause No.8 to Government
Resolution dated 10.06.2005.
6 In view of the above discussion we quash and set aside the
impugned order dated 05.07.2021 passed by respondent No.2 and the matter
is relegated back to respondent No.2 to consider the proposal filed by
respondent No.3 on 11.08.2020, in the light of Government Resolution dated
10.06.2005 (Revised Shikshan Sevak Scheme). Such decision be taken
within a period of eight weeks from today. Writ Petition stands disposed
accordingly. Rule made absolute in above terms.
( Y.G. Khobragade, J. ) ( Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J. )
agd
