Kalyan Revanappa Rodge v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6515 OF 2023 Kalyan Revanappa Rodge ...

PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, School Education Department Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

2.

The Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad 3.

The Education Officer (Primary) Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad 4.

The Superintendent, Zilla Parishad Pay and Provident Fund Unit (Primary), Aurangabad Tq. & District Aurangabad.

5.

Anand Ashram Nakshatrawadi Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad through its Secretary.

6.

Anand Vidhya Dham Nakshatrawadi, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad through its Head Master ...

RESPONDENTS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. V.S. Panpatte AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. A.A. Jagatkar Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 and 4 : Mr. V.C. Patil h/f. Mr. U.B. Bondar Advocate for Respondent Nos.5 and 6 : Mr. R.R. Bangar ...

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.J.

DATE : 10.07.2023 PER COURT :

Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP and the learned advocate Mr. V.C. Patil holding for Mr. Bondar who appears for respondent Nos.3 and 4 - Zilla Parishad.

1/3

2.

The petitioner who has been serving as assistant teacher with the respondent No.6 - School being run by respondent No.5 - Management is aggrieved by the impugned communication whereby proposal forwarded by the School for including his name in the Shalarth Pranali and allotment of ID for disbursement of the salary has been turned down by the impugned communication dated 07.03.2019 by referring to the Government Resolution dated 24.08.2018 for the reasons that he was supposed to clear the Teachers' Eligibility Test (TET examination) before 30.03.2019 but did not do so.

3.

We have heard both the sides who are unanimous that the issue as to the efficacy and legality of the Government Resolution dated 24.08.2018 is a subject matter which is pending before the Supreme Court where the teachers are aggrieved by the decision of this Court and a status quo has been ordered.

4.

In similar fact situation in several matters this Court has granted interim reliefs subject to the final out come of the matters before the Supreme Court. In Writ Petition No.3675/2022 by the order dated 21.03.2022 and several other matters, the respondents were directed to include the names of the petitioners in Shalarth Pranali to disburse the salary. When the petitioner has subsequently clear C.T.E.T., we are also inclined to grant the same relief.

5.

The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent No.2 shall take immediate steps for allotment 2/3

of Shalarth ID and respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall take immediate steps to disburse the salary regularly. However, it is made clear that this relief would be subject to the final out come of the matter before the Supreme Court. (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) habeeb 3/3