Mehmil Khan Yusuf Khan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 27 WRIT PETITION NO. 7299 OF 2015 MEHMIL KHAN YUSUF KHAN

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Patil Prakashsing B. AGP for Respondents 1 and 2 State: Mr. M. B.Bharaswadkar Advocate for Respondents 3 and 4 : Mrs. A. N. Ansari Advocate for Respondent No.5 : Mr. S.R. Barlinge WITH 27 WRIT PETITION NO. 5048 OF 2015 WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13039 OF 2016 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 5048 OF 2015 ANJUMAN TARAQUI-E-TALIM

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mrs. A. N. Ansari AGP for Respondents 1 and 2 State: Mr. M.

B.Bharaswadkar Advocate for Respondents 3 and 4 : Mr. Patil Prakashsing B.

Advocate for the applicant in C.A.:Mrs. S.S. Kazi

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA & K. L. WADANE, JJ.

DATE :

4th October, 2016 ORDER:

1.

The order passed by the Education Officer (Secondary) dated 10.12.2014 is the subject matter of consideration. The petitioner in Writ Petition No. 7299/2015 seeks implementation of the said order, whereas the petitioner in writ petition No. 5048 of 1/3

2015 assails the said order.

2.

We have gone through the said order. After reading the order, the order leads us nowhere with regard to the spectrum of the dispute between the parties. According to the institution, the vacancy that would arise would be for 8th to 10th Standards wherein the consideration in respect of teacher would be subject wise. Whereas, according to the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 7299/2012, the petitioner in WP No.7299/2015 is senior most and is required to be considered from 25%. As the petitioner is senior, having acquired necessary qualifications prior in point of time, he has been rightly given the benefit by the Education Officer.

3.

Perusing the order, it no way transpires as to whether the Education Officer has considered the contention as to the availability of the posts either in High school or the primary school to which 5th to 7th Standards are attached. There are rival contentions in this regard. The Education Officer is required to apply his mind and then consider all the relevant aspects i.e. the seniority, eligibility of the person to be considered in the particular pay scale or 2/3

eligibility of the person to be considered on the said post for a particular primary school/High School etc. As the order is bereft of all the aforesaid facts and details, we set aside the impugned order and direct the education officer to reconsider the issue before it after hearing all the affected/interested parties. 4.

The parties may appear before the Education Officer on 20th October, 2016.

5.

The Education officer shall consider the rival contentions of the respective parties and decide the writ issue afresh as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four months from the appearance of all the parties.

6. Writ petitions are accordingly disposed. No costs.

7. Civil application also stands disposed of. (K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ) JPC 3/3