Bombay High Court
Bharde Saksharata Prasarak Mandal ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 6 May, 2024
Author: Vibha Kankanwadi
Bench: Vibha Kankanwadi
2024:BHC-AUG:10051-DB
wp-3470-2022.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.8470 OF 2022
Bharde Saksharata Prasarak
Mandal, Shevgaon,
Through its Authorized Member of Trust,
Harish Shyamsundar Bharde,
Age: 48 years, Occu.: Member of Trust &
Agri. R/o. Shevgaon, Tq. Shevgaon,
Dist. Ahmednagar. .. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Principal Secretary,
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Dy. Director (Education)
Pune Division, Pune-1.
3. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar .. RESPONDENTS
...
Mr. K. M. Nagarkar, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mrs. M. N. Ghanekar, AGP for the respondents - State.
...
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.
DATE : 6th MAY, 2024.
ORDER [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :-
. Present petition has been filed challenging the impugned order
dated 22.11.2021 passed by respondent No.2 to the Deputy Director,
Pune Division, Pune, thereby rejecting the proposal to include the
[1]
wp-3470-2022.odt
name of Sau. Sapana Baburao Deshmukh in Shalarth Pranali.
2. The present petitioner is an Education Institution, which runs
school. There were two vacant posts of Assistant Teacher since 2011.
There was no policy of the State Government during that period to
permit to fill up the post of teaching and non teaching staff.
Thereafter, in due course, four posts became vacant of the Assistant
Teacher for different subjects in 2017. It created acute need for the
appointment of the Assistant Teachers and, therefore, Education
Institution had filed an application on 10.03.2017 to respondent No.3
for the permission. Thereafter, the petitioner had given an
advertisement on 12.05.2017 in daily newspaper for the interview of
the eligible candidates. One Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh came to
be appointed as Shikshan Sevak for three years from 15.06.2017.
Accordingly, the appointment order was issued. Proposal was sent for
grant of approval to her appointment on 17.12.2018. It was containing
the name of two teachers including said Sau. Sapna Baburao
Deshmukh. Approval was granted on 27.04.2020 by respondent No.3
to the appointment of those two teachers. Thereafter, further proposal
was sent for inclusion of name of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh in
Shalarth Pranali for the purpose of salary. The said proposal was sent
by respondent No.3 to Deputy Director, Pune Division, Pune. There
was deficiency which was cleared, but ultimately by order dated
[2]
wp-3470-2022.odt
22.11.2021, respondent No.2 rejected the said proposal on the ground
that the appointment of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh is not through
Pavitra Portal in view of Government Resolution dated 24.08.2018.
3. Heard learned Advocate Mr. K. M. Nagarkar for the petitioner
and learned AGP Mrs. M. N. Ghanekar for the respondent - State. In
order to cut short, it can be said that both of them have made
submissions in support of their respective contentions.
4. At the outset, we would like to say that the approval has been
granted to the appointment of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh by
order dated 27.04.2020, but prior to that the Upper Secretary,
Government of Maharashtra, had sanctioned the said approval by
letter dated 17.12.2018 and had taken into consideration the date of
appointment of the said employee as 15.06.2017. In view of the said
fact, i.e. on its own conduct of respondent No.1, it can be said that
when government is accepting the date of appointment of Sau. Sapna
Baburao Deshmukh as 15.06.2017, then the Government Resolution
dated 24.08.2018 cannot be made applicable retrospectively to her
appointment. Another fact is that said Upper Secretary had the
occasion to consider whether proper procedure has been adopted or
not at the time of appointment of employee and opined that since the
appointment is by not taking permission, the authorities to ensure that
the compliance is done. Now, we can consider that application was
[3]
wp-3470-2022.odt
given by the petitioner on 10.03.2017 to respondent No.3 seeking
permission to advertise. It was for four posts. The respondents have
not stated as to why respondent No.3 had not responded to the said
application. Now, thereafter, respondent No.3 had accorded approval
to the appointment of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh by order dated
27.04.2020 and her date of appointment has been taken as
15.06.2017. Again, at the cost of repetition, for that purpose, the
Deputy Director of Education ought not to have made the effect of
Government Resolution dated 24.08.2018 applicable retrospectively to
the appointment of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh.
5. Another fact regarding Pavitra Portal is concerned, there is
nothing on record to show that Pavitra Portal was in operation on the
date of appointment of the petitioner or the date of advertisement
issued by the respondent management. As observed by this Court in
various judgments, based on affidavits filed on behalf of Education
Officer, it has been surfaced that Pavitra Portal became operative on
20.06.2019. If that was the scenario, there is no reason to blame the
management of the school for making appointments without resorting
to the Pavitra Portal. The inclusion of the said employee's name in
view of the proposal submitted by the petitioner on 22.06.2021 was
also recommended by respondent No.3 on 21.07.2021. Therefore,
there is no reason to again raise clouds of doubt regarding legality of
[4]
wp-3470-2022.odt
the appointment of Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh and, therefore, the
impugned order dated 22.11.2021 deserves to be set aside. Though
the consequential reliefs have not been specifically prayed in order to
avoid multiplicity of litigation, we are taking note of the same and
passing order. Hence, the following order :-
ORDER
I) The Writ Petition is hereby allowed.
II) The impugned order dated 22.11.2021 passed by
respondent No.2 - Deputy Director (Education), Pune Division,
Pune, is hereby quashed and set aside.
III) Respondent No.2 is directed to include the name of
Sau. Sapna Baburao Deshmukh in Shalarth Pranali and release
the arrears of salary of the said employee as per law, in two
installments of having duration of three months. The first
installment to start from 27.05.2024 and the second installment
would be due three months thereafter.
[ S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
scm
