High Court
Legal Reasoning
wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtIN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYBENCH AT AURANGABADWRIT PETITION NO.4238 OF 2024Nahid Kausar Malik Basheer AhmadAge: 32 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. At Post Khirwad, Tq. Raver,District Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUS1.The State of Maharashtra,Through its Secretary,School Education and Sports Department,Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.2.The Director of Education,(Secondary and Higher Secondary).Directorate of Education, Maharashtra State,Pune.3.The Deputy Director of Education,Nashik Division, Nashik.4.The Education Officer (Secondary),Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon,District Jalgaon.5.The Superintendent,Salary and Provident Fund Cell(Secondary), Jalgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.6.Mustafa Education Society,Chopda, Tq. Chopda,District Jalgaon,Through its President/Secretary.7.Mustafa Education Society’s,Mustafa Anglo Urdu High Schooland Junior College, Chopda,Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon,Through its Head Master... RESPONDENTS[1] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odt…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4239 OF 2024Naziya Bi Imran Ali Saiyad,(Jahgirdar Naziyabi Mukhtarahmad),Age: 27 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. Azad Chowk, Mothi Darga Ali,Chopda, Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors... RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4240 OF 2024Mazhar Khan Shakil Kha,Age: 34 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. 3/23-K, Sundargadhi Road,Chopda, Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon... PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4241 OF 2024Nadeem Khan Ahesan Khan,Age: 33 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. Near Ali Masjid, Darga Ali(Zilani Manzil) 2839, Chopda,Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4242 OF 2024Saeed Abdul Rashid,Age: 33 years, Occu.: Service,[2] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtR/o. Near Ali Masjid, Darga Ali(Zilani Manzil) 2839, Chopda,Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4243 OF 2024Shoaib Khan Sultan KhanAge: 37 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. 17, Minal Society, Bhabha Nagar,Nashik, Tq. And Dist. Nashik. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4244 OF 2024Mohammad Parvez Mohammad Haroon,Age: 27 years, Occu.: Service,R/o. Near Masjid, Tq. Chopda,Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS…WITHWRIT PETITION NO.4245 OF 2024Pinjari Shakil Ahamad Shaikh Ayyub,Age: 37 years, Occu.: Service,R/o.38, Gut No.890/2, KGN Colony,Chopda, Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon. .. PETITIONERVERSUSThe State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. RESPONDENTS[3]
Legal Reasoning
wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odt…Mr. Y. B. Bolkar, Advocate for the petitioners in all the writ petitions.Mr. K. S. Patil, AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 5 in all the writ petitions.Mr. V. B. Madan, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 and 7 in all the writpetitions.… CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.DATE : 23rd APRIL, 2024.ORDER [Per Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.] :- .All the matters pertain to the Employees of respondent No.6employed with respondent No.7 School. They all are challenging theorders dated 12.10.2023 and 29.03.2024 passed by respondent No.4.Respondent No.6 is the minority institution which runs respondentNo.7 School. The certificate of minority status has been granted on20.11.2008. Respondent No.6 had made a request to respondent No.4by communication dated 20.09.2018 to accord permission to fillvacant posts. Respondent No.4 replied vide communication dated14.12.2018 that since respondent No.6 is a minority institution it isnot required to seek permission to fill up the vacant posts. Thereuponrespondent No.6 published an advertisement in widely circulatednewspaper “Daily Divya Marathi” on 09.05.2023 for the post ofAssistant Teachers / Shikshan Sevaks on aided division. Interviewswere held on 15.05.2023 and the selected candidates were givenappointment order on 15.06.2023. Accordingly, they have joined the[4] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtservices. Thereafter, respondent No.7 forwarded the proposals torespondent No.4 for granting approval to the services of thepetitioners by covering letter dated 11.07.2023 and along with thesame, necessary documents were forwarded. When respondent No.4had not taken any steps, some of the petitioners approached thisCourt by filing writ petitions for giving direction to respondent No.4 totake decision on the proposals. Such directions came to be issued bythis Court by order dated 27.09.2023. By order dated 12.10.2023 itwas then informed that since the change report in respect ofrespondent No.6 has been decided and the appeal is pending beforethe Assistant Charity Comissioner, Jalgaon, till the dispute comes to anend and new trustees take charge, no decision would be taken on theproposals. However, thereafter on 28.12.2023, notice was given byrespondent No.4 stating that the matter would be heard on03.01.2024 and the proposal is then objected by Ex-Chairman. Thedata from the office of Assistant Charity Commissioner, Jalgaon wascollected in respect of pendency of the change reports. Then by orderdated 07.03.2024, the then Education Officer (Secondary), ZillaParishad, Jalgaon decided that since the change reports are pending, itwill be appropriate to make a statement that a proper managementhad taken a decision to appoint the petitioners, thereby the proposalswere kept pending by the said order. However, it appears that all of asudden on 29.03.2024, the said proposal came to be rejected on the[5] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtground that the change reports are pending before the CharityCommissioner authorities. Hence, those orders are under challenge. 2.Heard learned Advocate Mr. Y. B. Bolkar for the petitioners in allthe petitions, learned AGP Mr. K. S. Patil for respondent Nos.1 to 5 inall the petitions and learned Advocate Mr. V. B. Madan for respondentNos.6 and 7 in all the petitions.3.Learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that pendency ofthe change reports before Charity Commissioner cannot be a groundto reject the proposal to accord approval to the appointments of thepetitioners. The petitioners being the teachers have nothing to do withthe internal dispute between the management. He relies on thedecision in Nita Pandurang Chavan v. State of Maharashtra, ThroughDepartment of Education and Others, [2021 SCC OnLine Bom. 2978],wherein reliance has been placed on the decisions in NarsinhaShikshan Prasarak Mandal v. Education Officer (Secondary) ZillaParishad, Kolhapur, [Writ Petition No.1847 of 2012 decided on16.12.2016] and Dr. Ishrat Ullah Khan v. The State of Maharashtra,[Writ Petition No.4474 of 2012]. It was held that the Education Officeris not required to go into the inter se dispute between themanagement. He is required to see as to whether the teacher wasentitled for grant of approval or not. The learned Advocate for thepetitioners also relied on the circular / communication dated[6] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odt05.03.2021 by the Director of Education (Secondary and HigherSecondary), wherein it was instructed that when there is disputebetween the management and the change reports are still pendingbefore the appropriate authority, then it should be noted as to whosename / which person’s name is appearing in the PTR extract. The saidcommunication dated 05.03.2021 was communicated by the DivisionalDeputy Director of Education, Nashik on 04/16.06.2021 to all theEducation Officers (Secondary) within his jurisdiction. LearnedAdvocate for the petitioners submits that the said circular /communication has not been adhered to and, therefore, those ordersdeserve to be set aside. 4.There is no doubt that the dispute appears to be pending beforethe Joint Charity Commissioner / Assistant Joint Charity Commissionerand the change reports are also pending under Section 22 of theMaharashtra Public Trust Act. However, taking into consideration thedecision in Dr. Ishrat Ullah Khan (Supra), Narsinha Shikshan PrasarakMandal (Supra) and Nita Pandurang Chavan (Supra), respondent No.4ought not to have rejected the proposals. Furthermore, when theearlier Education Officer by order dated 07.03.2024 had kept the saidproposals pending by giving reasons, all of a sudden, after takingcharge, the present officer ought not to have passed the impugnedorder dated 29.03.2024. The subsequent officer has in fact stepped[7] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtinto shoes of her predecessor and, therefore, without giving anyintimation or notice, the proposals ought not to have been decided.The decision is on the only ground that change reports are pending forapproval. That means, the communication dated 05.03.2021, in turncommunication dated 04/16.06.2021 by the Higher Authorities and theaforesaid decisions of this Court were not considered by the presentrespondent No.4 (Smt. Kalpana Chavan) and, therefore, the said orderdeserves to be set aside. Necessary directions are then required to begiven to respondent No.4 for deciding the proposals for approval.Hence, the following order :-ORDERI)All the writ petitions are hereby partly allowed.II)The impugned orders dated 12.10.2023 and 29.03.2024passed by respondent No.4 Education Officer (Secondary),Jalgaon, are hereby quashed and set aside. III)Respondent No.4 is directed to decide the proposals forapproval of the appointment of the petitioners on its own merit,however, it should not be rejected on the ground that thedispute or change reports in respect of respondent No.5 arepending before Assistant/Joint Charity Commissioner. The saidproposals for approval be decided within a period of (8) eightweeks from today.[8] wp-4238-2024 and 7 other matters.odtIV)The decision so taken be informed to the respectivepetitioners within a period of one week from the date of thedecision. [ S. G. CHAPALGAONKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGEscm[9]