Bombay High Court
Bharat Education Society, Through Its ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Dept. Of ... on 19 December, 2023
Author: Anuja Prabhudessai
Bench: Anuja Prabhudessai
2023:BHC-NAG:17328-DB
38-6440-22.odt
1/5
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 6440 OF 2022
1. Bharat Education Society, Arvi, Tahsil,
Arvi, Distt. Wardha Through it's
Secretary.
2. Model High School & Jr. College Arvi
Tah.Arvi, Distt.Wardha Through its
Principal.
3. Vaibhav Ramesh Chadnak,Aged about 35
years, Occupation Service, R/o Ganpati
Ward Main Road, Arvi, Distt.Wardha.
4. Manoj Vitthalrao Newale, Aged about 35
years, Occup.Service, R/o and Post: Sirpur
(Boke) Arvi, Distt. Wardha..
5. Ms.Rupali Ramesh Malode, Aged about
33 years, occupation:Service R/o C/o.
Pankaj Jalit, Shriram Ward, Near Ram
Mandir Arvi, Distt.Wardha. Petitioners
-Versus-
1. The State of Maharashtra, Department of
Education,Mantralaya, Mumbai 32
Through its Secretary.
2. The Education Officver, Zilla Parishad,
Wardha.
3. The Deputy Director of Education,
Nagpur Division, Nagpur. Respondents
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr.S.S.Ghate, counsel for the petitioners.
Ms.S.S.Jachak,Addl.G.P for the respondent Nos.1to 3.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kavita.
38-6440-22.odt
2/5
CORAM : ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI
AND
VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 19th December, 2023
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per :Anuja Prabhudessai, J.)
Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is
heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
3. By this writ petition filed under Article 226 and 227 of
the Constitution, the petitioner has sought the following relief:
(ii) to quash and set aside the Order
No.597 of 2021 dated 29.01.2021 passed
by the respondent no.3 and further be
pleased to direct the respondent no.3 to
accord approval in the names of the
petitioners 3 to 5 from the academic sessions
2018-19 together with arrears of salary
within the stipulated period.
4. The petitioner is the Society duly registered under
Societies Registration Act and the petitioner No.2 is one of the
Schools and Jr. College run by the petitioner No.1 Society. The
petitioner Nos.1 and 2 had appointed the petitioner Nos.3 to 5 as
teachers in petitioner No.2-School by issuing appointment orders
Kavita.
38-6440-22.odt
dated 13.12.2017. The petitioner Nos.3 to 5 were appointed by
following valid recruitment process and their appointment was
approved on 06.06.2018 for one academic year. The petitioner
No.1 submitted the proposal dated 31.07.2018 for further
approval to the appointment of petitioner Nos. 3 to 5. Since no
decision was taken, the petitioners filed Writ Petition No.7334 of
2019, which was disposed of on 27.01.2021 with directions to the
respondents to take appropriate decision within a period of one
week. Pursuant to the said order, respondent by order dated
29.01.2021 rejected the proposal to approve the appointment of
the petitioner Nos.3 to 5 on the ground that their appointments
were on temporary basis.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the case
of the petitioners is covered by the decision in Writ Petition 1330
of 2019 (Gramsewak Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Vs. State of
Maharashtra), which, decision was based on earlier decision in
Writ Petition No.5245 of 2018 (Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and
ors. Vs. Deputy Director of Education and anr.). The facts of the
present petition are similar to the facts of the above petitions,
hence the case stands fully covered by the judgment passed in Writ
Kavita.
38-6440-22.odt
Petition 1330 of 2019 and Writ Petition No.5245 of 2018, in view
of which, we allow the petition with following directions.
(i) The impugned order No.597 of 2021 dated 29.01.2021
passed by the respondent no.3 is hereby quash and set aside.
(ii) The Education Officer or the Deputy Director of
Education, as the case may be, shall consider or reconsider, as
the case may be, the proposal seeking approval to the
appointments of the petitioners-teachers on merits and in
accordance with law.
(iii) The proposal shall not be rejected on the ground that
the appointments are not make through Pavitra Portal system,
if the appointments are made on the strength of interim orders
of the High Court or during the period when the Pavitra
Portal was not functional.
(iv) The petitioners shall produce the copy of this order
before the appropriate authority which shall take appropriate
decision after hearing all the stakeholders including the
intervenors, who may wish to be heard, within six weeks from
the production of the copy of this order.
Kavita.
38-6440-22.odt
6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.
(VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J) (ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J)
Signed by: Kavita P Tayade
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 22/12/2023 16:43:26 Kavita.
