Rajarshi Shahu Shikshan Sanstha Through Its Secretary And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

1 wp 11720.16

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 11720 OF 2016 Rajashri Shahu Shikshan Sanstha Sillod through its Secretary and others .. Petitioners

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra and another .. Respondents Shri V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. R. P. Gaur, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 09TH NOVEMBER, 2017.

FINAL ORDER :

.

Mr. Panpatte, the learned counsel for petitioners submits that, on 12.09.2016 proposal is given by the petitioner No. 2 to the Education Officer Secondary seeking approval to the appointment and transfer of the petitioner No. 3 from unaided to aided post. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner was appointed on 23.08.2011 on unaided post and since then is continuously working with petitioner No. 2. The approval is granted on 08.12.2011 on probation. By order dated 01.04.2014 approval is granted on permanent basis. The petitioner is transferred on vacant post on aided basis on 10.09.2016. The

2 wp 11720.16 proposal submitted for approval to transfer is rejected on 21.09.2016. The said transfer to the aided post is permissible. The learned counsel relies on the following judgments of the Division Bench of this Court.

(i) Order dated 12.09.2012 in Writ Petition No. 5258 of 2012 Ms. Sandhya Laxman Ghosalkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra with other connected writ petition. (ii) Order dated 18.02.2014 in Writ Petition No. 9173 of 2013 with other connected writ petitions.

(iii) Order dated 16.09.2014 in Writ Petition No. 3197 of 2014. (iv) Order dated 17.09.2014 in Writ Petition No. 676 of 2014 with other connected writ petitions.

(v) Judgment dated 11.10.2012 in Writ Petition No. 2960 of 2012.

(vi) Order dated 09.10.2014 in Writ Petition No. 5978 of 2014 with other connected writ petitions.

So also rule 41 of the Maharashtra Employees of the Private Schools (Condition of Service Regulation) Rules. 2.

The learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent No. 2 submits that, there are large number of surplus candidates, who are required to be absorbed and thus act of transfer of the petitioner to aided post is not permissible. The learned A. G. P. also relies on the Circular dated 28.06.2016 to submit that, the petitioner will have to first work as a Shikshan

3 wp 11720.16 Sevak on the said post.

3.

The circular dated 28.06.2016 would not apply in the present matter as the petitioner is transferred from unaided to aided post on 01.07.2015 i. e. prior to the said circular. 4.

The aforesaid judgments referred to supra lay down that, there is no bar to transfer the Assistant Teachers from unaided to aided posts. The aspect of surplus teachers is also considered by the Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 2960 of 2012 under judgment dated 11th October, 2012. 5.

Considering the above, we pass following order. 7.

The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent No. 2 shall take decision upon the proposal of the petitioner afresh, expeditiously and preferably within a period of three (03) months from today and shall not reject it in view of Circular dated 28.06.2016, so also on the ground that, there are surplus candidates available. The writ petition accordingly is disposed of. No costs.

[S. M. GAVHANE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/Nov. 17