Sanjaykumar Govindrao Rebale And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 829 OF 2018 Sanjaykumar s/o Govindrao Rebale Age 39 years, occ. service as Junior Clerk.

Satish s/o Manikrao Rathod Age 43 years, occ. service as Laboratory Attendant Govind s/o Jaising Rathod Age 47 years, occ. service as Peon Ashok s/o Ganpat Rathod Age 44 years, occ. service as Peon Bhimrao s/o Ramkishan Rathod Age 41 years, occ. service as Peon Prakash s/o Devala Rathod Age 39 years, occ. service as Cook.

Rajaram s/o Shankar Chavan Age 47 years, occ. service as Kamathi Datta s/o Laxman Walage Age 38 years, occ. service as Kamathi Santosh s/o Baliram Jadhav Age 47 years, occ. service as Superintendent.

Uttam s/o Dhansing Rathod Age 49 years, occ. service as Cook.

{2} Ashok s/o Tulshiram Garje Age 53 years, occ. service as Cook.

Shivaji s/o Mansing Jadhav Age 46 years, occ. service as Helper.

Shivaji s/o Somsing Rathod Age 49 years, occ. service as Kamathi All r/o Manjari, Tq. Mukhed Dist. Nanded.

Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Social Justice and Special Assistance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.

The Assistant Commissioner Social Welfare Department Nanded, Dist. Nanded.

Secondary Ashram School Manjari, Tq. Mukhed Dist. Nanded.

Primary Ashram School Manjari, Tq. Mukhed Dist. Nanded Respondents Mr. V.S. Panpatte, advocate for petitioners.

Mrs. G.L. Deshpande, AGP for respondents no. 1 and 2. Mr. V.B. Jadhav, advocate for respondents no. 3 and 4. CORAM : R.M.BORDE AND MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 16th October, 2018.

{3} JUDGMENT : (Per R.M. Borde, J.) 1.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

2.

Heard finally at admission stage with the consent of learned counsel for the respective parties.

3.

The issue raised in the instant petition is no more res integra and is covered by the decision rendered by Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1627/2016 decided on 25.09.2016. 4.

For the reasons recorded in the aforesaid judgment, we issue following directions :

The respondents are directed to examine the case of the petitioners for deciding whether they satisfy the criteria laid down for claiming benefits under the ACPS to the private aided Government schools under the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1998, as modified from time to time, and if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to claim benefits under the scheme, and they satisfy the eligibility criteria, the respondents shall extend the benefits to the petitioners. The respondents shall scrutinize the case of the petitioners within a period of six months, and extend them the benefits as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of four months from such scrutiny.

5.

Rule made absolute in above terms.

MANGESH S. PATIL R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE dyb