Smt. Priyanka Wd/O. Pravin ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10685 Bom

                                          1                          wp6862.23


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

                WRIT PETITION NO. 6862 OF 2023

Smt. Priyanka wd/o Pravin Mutkure                  .. Petitioner

                    V/s.

State of Maharashtra and others                    .. Respondents

                                   ......
Mr. Yash Venkatraman with Mrs. Gauri Venkatraman, Counsel for
the petitioner,
Ms. Ritu Sharma, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 and 2,
Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, Counsel for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
                                 .....

           CORAM : DEVENDRA KUMAR UPADHYAYA, CJ.
                   AND A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

           DATE       : 16th OCTOBER, 2023.

P.C.

Ms. Ritu Sharma, learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of notice for respondent Nos. 1 and 2 whereas Mr. B.G. Kulkarni, learned Counsel waives service of notice for respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

2. Let an affidavit-in-reply be filed by the respondents within three weeks. Two weeks' time thereafter shall be available to the learned Counsel for the petitioner to file rejoinder affidavit, if any.

3. Stand over to 28-11-2023.

2 wp6862.23

4. Submission of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that the order dated 28-9-2023 passed by the Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Bhandara whereby the proposal for appointment of the petitioner has been refused, is not tenable for the reason that reliance placed by the said Education Officer while passing the said order on the Government Resolution dated 25-2-2019 is not available for him. It has further been argued that the conditions of service including the educational qualifications requisite for appointment of teachers are governed by the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (Rules of 1981) which have been framed by the State Government in exercise of its statutory powers vested in it under Section 16 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (Act of 1977). Unless and until the Rules of 1981 are amended, the qualification prescribed therein has to be adhered to. It is further submission that the Government Resolution dated 25-2-2019 which is a simple executive direction cannot supersede the institutional perspective available in the Rules of 1981. In support of his submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Sachin Panjabrao Surwade and others vs. State of Maharashtra and another, 2019 SCC OnLine Bom. 1765.

5. Having regard to the aforesaid submissions, we prima facie find that the emphasis on the Government Resolution dated 25-2-2019 for rejecting the proposal of appointment of the petitioner does not appear to be correct for the simple reason that unless and until the Rules of 1981 are amended in terms of the 3 wp6862.23

educational perspective available in the Act of 1977, merely by issuing the Government Resolution, the qualification cannot be amended.

6. We thus direct that the services of the petitioner shall not be terminated by the school management till the next date of listing. However, the salary to be paid to the petitioner, shall be reimbursed by the State in case the petitioner succeeds in this case.

                      (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)                            (CHIEF JUSTICE)

   adgokar




Signed by: MR. P.M. ADGOKAR
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 16/10/2023 18:09:20