Dinesh Shivajirao Telang v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.6002 OF 2018 Dinesh s/o Shivajirao Telang Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & others Respondents Mr.Vijay A. Dhakane, advocate for petitioner. Mrs.G.L.Deshpande, AGP for Respondent No.1.

Mr.S.B.Pulkundwar, advocate for Respondents No.2 & 3. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA & AVINASH G. GHAROTE,J J.

DATE : 21st November, 2019 PER COURT:

Mr.Dhakane, learned Counsel for the petitioner, contends that the petitioner was initially appointed under National Sakshar Program. Subsequently, he was appointed under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan at Zilla Parishad, Nanded. The last appointment was to be continued up to September, 2018. However, in June 2018, the petitioner was terminated from service without notice and without calling any explanation from him. It is contended that the same is illegal as other persons are continued under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan.

The petitioner, in June 2019, has approached

{2} Respondent No.1 and gave representation. It is stated that Respondents require Data Entry Operators.

Mr.Pulkundwar, learned Counsel for Respondents No.2 & 3, submits that the petitioner was wrongly appointed under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. The National Sakshar Program has come to an end. There is procedure prescribed for appointment in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan. The same is not followed by the petitioner.

In case, selection process is initiated for appointment of Data Entry Operators in Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan, the petitioner can apply, provided he qualifes the criteria. It is not disputed by the other parties that National Sakshar Scheme has come to an end. The petitioner cannot be continued after the end of the scheme.

In the light of that, at present, no relief can be granted to the petitioner.

The petitioner has approached the State Government with representation. It is for the State Government to consider the same. The State Government shall endeavour to take

{3} decision on the representation fled by the petitioner, on its own merits, preferably within six months.

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

AVINASH G. GHAROTE S.V.GANGAPURWALA JUDGE JUDGE adb