Bombay High Court
Jayawant Gulabrao Nimbalkar vs The Education Officer (Secondary) ... on 15 December, 2023
Author: Madhav J. Jamdar
Bench: Madhav J. Jamdar
2023:BHC-AS:38079
908. WP 14801-2023.doc
Anand IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 14801 OF 2023
Jaywant Gulabrao Nimbalkar .Petitioner
Vs.
The Education Offcer (Secondary), Pune & ors. .Respondents
Ms. Rekha Musale, Advocate, for the Petitioner
Mr. P. G. Sawant, AGP, for Respondent No. 1 - State
Mr. Venkatesh Shinde, Advocate, for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3
CORAM : MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.
DATE : 15.12.2023
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Heard Ms. Musale, learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioner, Mr. Sawant, learned AGP appearing for Respondent
No. 1 - State and Mr. Shinde, learned counsel appearing for
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3.
2. By the present Petition fled under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India, the Petitioner is challenging the legality
and validity of the Order dated 26.06.2022 passed by the
Education Offcer(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Pune, by which a
proposal submitted to the Education Offcer pursuant to the
Order dated 17.02.2021 passed by a learned Single Judge of this
Court (Coram : M. S. Karnik, J.) in W. P. No. 9237 of 2019 was
1 of 4
908. WP 14801-2023.doc
rejected. A perusal of the order dated 17.02.2021 shows that the
Petitioner was appointed as a Junior Clerk on 09.06.1997 and
thereafter, appointed as a Shikshan Sevak in the year 2008. The
services of the Petitioner were terminated in the year 2011. The
termination of services were challenged before the School
Tribunal. The School Tribunal dismissed the Appeal. The learned
Single Judge of this Court by Order dated 17.02.2021 modifed
the Order passed by the School Tribunal by directing that the
Petitioner be reinstated as Junior Clerk with effect from
01.06.2021 and further directed that the Petitioner will be
entitled for salary and other benefts with effect from 01.06.2021.
Further directions which are relevant for disposal of the present
Petition are given in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the said Order of the
learned Single dated 17.02.2021. The said paragraphs 5 & 6 read
as under :-
"5. Learned Counsel for Respondents
No. 1 & 2 submitted that the salary
grant proposal made to the Respondent
No. 3 may be considered. Learned AGP
says that the post where the Petitioner is
to be reinstated is not eligible for grant-
in-aid. These are the issues to be
considered by the Education Offcer
when the proposal is submitted. The
contention as to whether Petitioner's
post is entitled to salary grant is kept
open to be considered by the Education
Offcer. The Petition is partly allowed in
the above terms.
2 of 4
908. WP 14801-2023.doc
6. It is open for the Management to
submit a proposal to the Education
Offcer. So far as claim for continuity of
service and salary grant from
01/06/2021 is concerned, the same shall
be considered on its own merits and in
accordance with law. The Petitioner is
personally present in the Court and
agrees for reinstatement as Junior Clerk
with effect from 01/06/2021 and that he
would forego the claim as Shikshan
Sevak & backwages."
(Emphasis added)
3. It is the contention of Ms. Musale, learned counsel
appearing for the Petitioner on the basis of record maintained by
the Education Offcer(Secondary) - Respondent No. 1 (page No.
76 of the Writ Petition) that there is one post of Junior Clerk and
the said post is aided. Pursuant to the order dated 17.02.2021,
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 i. e. Management submitted that the
proposal was sent to the Education Offcer and same has been
rejected by Order dated 21.06.2022. The impugned order shows
that the reason given is that reservation policy is not followed by
the management. However, perusal of the Order dated
17.02.2021 of the learned Single Judge shows that the only
objection raised was the said post is not eligible for grant-in-aid.
The impugned order was not passed on that ground. In fact,
record of the Education Offcer(Secondary) (Page No. 74 of the
3 of 4
908. WP 14801-2023.doc
Petition) clearly shows that the post of Junior Clerk is aided.
Respondent No. 1 has fled affdavit-in-reply dated 13.12.2023
re-iterating stand which is stated in the impugned order.
However, same is contrary to the directions dated 17.02.2021
issued by the learned Single Judge of this Court. Accordingly, the
Writ Petition deserves to be allowed.
4. The Writ Petition is disposed of by issuing the
following directions.
O R D E R
(i) The order dated 21.06.2022 passed by the Education
Offcer(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Pune (Exhh.'R') is quashed &
set aside;
(ii) The proposal dated 02.06.2021 submitted by the
Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 is directed to be processed in accordance
with the observations made in this order as well as in the order
dated 17.02.2021 passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court
in W. P. No. 9237 of 2019. Same be done within a period of eight
weeks from today and consequently, the Petitioner's name be
included in Shalarth ID.
5. The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms with
no order as to costs.
(MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.)
4 of 4
