Pushpa Jeevanrao Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

(1)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.338 OF 2019 Pushpa Jeevanrao Patil, Age: 36 years, Occu: Service as Assistant Teacher, R/o Bodhe Nagar, Near Kala Maruti Temple, Mane Nivas, Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur ..PETITIONER

VERSUS

1.

The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 2.

The Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Latur 3.

Vyankatesh Shikshan Sanstha, Papvinash Road, Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur, Through its Secretary 4.

Vyankatesh Primary School, Papvinash Road, Latur, Tq. & Dist. Latur, Through its Head Master ..RESPONDENTS Mr V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for petitioner;

Mr V. S. Badakh, A.G.P. for respondent No.1 CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.

DATE : 14th January, 2019 ORAL ORDER:

Heard Mr Panpatte, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

(2) 2.

A limited grievance is raised in the petition. The petitioner was appointed as a 'Shikshan Sevak' in response to the advertisement issued in the local newspaper. A copy of the appointment order is placed on record at Exh.'D'. The petitioner was appointed on 28th September, 2012. The petitioner had completed three years of service as a 'Shikshan Sevak' and is entitled for the benefits under the Government Resolution dated 14th October, 2010, more particularly Clause-4 of the said Resolution, is the submission of learned Counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner then submitted that though the proposal is pending before the Education Officer, no decision is taken. As such, the petitioner prays for directions to the Education Officer to take a decision on her proposal, submitted to the Education Officer on 26th September, 2012 for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner and then for further benefits of continuity of service as available under the Government Resolution dated 14th October, 2010. 4.

In view aforesaid facts, we dispose of the writ petition with directions to respondent No.2 to decide the proposal dated 26th September, 2012 and then to consider the claim of the petitioner for grant of continuity of service, in view of Government Resolution dated 14th October, 2010, needless to state on the merits of the proposal and the fact situation in case of the

(3) petitioner, as early as possible and not later than twelve weeks from the date of the order of this Court.

With the aforesaid directions, writ petition is disposed of. (S. M. GAVHANE, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) sjk