Ramakant Raghunath Shigwan v. The Ratnagir Zilla Parishad And ORS.

1 11 WP 9274-2015.doc Sequeira

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9274 OF 2015.

Ramakant Raghunath Shigwan .. Petitioner Vs The Ratnagiri Zilla Parishad and others .. Respondents Mr.S.D.Rupwate, for the Petitioner.

Mr.A.B.Kadam - Additional Government Pleader, for Respondent Nos.5 to 7.

Mr.Neel G. Helekar, for Respondent Nos.1 to 3. CORAM : PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, C.J. & N.M.JAMDAR, J.

Date : 6 June, 2019.

P.C. :

1.

The Petitioner has a degree of 'Sahitya Sudharak' issued by Bambai Hindi Vidyapeeth in the year 1974 and the 'Shiksha Visharad' degree issued by Hindi Sahitya Sammelan, Prayog in March 2013.

2.

The Petitioner claims that the former degree is equivalent to a degree in Bachelor of Arts and the latter equivalent to B.Ed degree. It is the case of the Petitioner that in view of

2 11 WP 9274-2015.doc Government Resolutions dated 23 August 2011 and 4 April 2012 treating the two degrees as equivalent to B.A and B.Ed the Petitioner was granted employment at a taluka school established by Ratnagiri Zilla Parishad and subsequently promoted. Grievance is to the first Respondent withdrawing benefit of the promotion to the Petitioner and ordered demotion treating the Petitioner to be not holding a B.A and B.Ed degree.

3.

There is no traverse to the averments made in the Writ Petition till date.

4.

Learned counsel for the Petitioner has produced a directive letter dated 5 December 2018 addressed by the Secretary of the Education Department, State of Maharashtra to the Education Officer of Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri. The said letter refers to the government decisions and directs the Education Officer of the Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri to treat the two degrees relied upon by the Petitioner as equivalent to B.A and B.Ed.

5.

Declaring that the Ratnagiri Zilla Parishad would be bound by the directive issued by the State, we dispose of the Petition noting that when the Petition was filed the Petitioner was under the threat of demotion which has not been actually given effect to. N.M.JAMDAR, J.

CHIEF JUSTICE