Dismissed

Smt.v.v.Parulekar. v. Maha Vidya Vikas Maha Mandal and Ors.

Bombay HC12 Aug 2005WP/365/1993

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Five writ petitions filed by assistant teachers challenging non-inclusion in trained graduate scale. Court held that eligibility requires B.Ed., not just graduation. Dismissed petitions noting recruits were approved later.

What did the court decide?

Petitions dismissed with no order as to costs.

What the court decided

Smt.v.v.Parulekar. Vs Maha Vidya Vikas Maha… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2005)

¶1

:1:

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O.O.C.J.

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.365 OF 1993

¶4

Vinita Vinayak Parulekar, residing at 10/A, Kanchan Kutir, Pandurang Wadi, Dombivali (East), Thane.

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

v/s.

¶7

The Chairman, Maharashtra Vidya Vikas Mahamandal, having his office at S.K.Pantwalvalkar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶8

Headmaster, S.K.Pant-Walawalkar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶9

Education Inspector, Greater Bombay-North Region, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Churchgate, Bombay-400 020.

¶10

Director of Education (Schools) having his offie at Central Building, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-1.

¶11

Smt.Manisha Shirke Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehrunagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶12

Mrs.Shinde S., Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶13

Mrs.Sapule, Assistant teacher in New English School, Bhandup, Bombay-400 024.

¶14

:2:

¶15

Shri Koyande, Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024. .. Respondents

¶16

Mr.Mihir Desai for the petitioner.

¶17

Shri C.S.Joshi for the respondent No.2.

¶18

Mr.P.M.Mokashi, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.

¶19

ALONGWITH

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO.367 OF 1993

¶21

Smt.Shilpa Dinesh Parulekar residing at C/2, Azad Nagar, Kidwai Road, Wadala, Bombay- 400 031. .. Petitioner

¶22

v/s.

¶23

The Chairman, Maharashtra Vidya Vikas Mahamandal, having his office at S.K.Pantwalvalkar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶24

Headmaster, S.K.Pant-Walawalkar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶25

Education Inspector, Greater Bombay-North Region, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Churchgate, Bombay-400 020.

¶26

Director of Education (Schools) having his offie at Central Building, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-1.

¶27

:3:

¶28

Smt.Manisha Shirke Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehrunagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶29

Mrs.Shinde S., Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶30

Mrs.Sapule, Assistant teacher in New English School, Bhandup, Bombay-400 024.

¶31

Shri Koyande, Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶32

.. Respondents

¶33

Mr.Mihir Desai for the petitioner.

¶34

Shri C.S.Joshi for the respondent No.2.

¶35

Mr.P.M.Mokashi, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.

¶36

ALONGWITH

¶37

WRIT PETITION NO.371 OF 1993

¶38

Smt.Shama Dattaram Vichare, residing at 24, Jainarnath Co.op. Hsg.Society, Vasantwadi, Sant Namdeo Path, Dombivli (East), Thane.

¶39

.. Petitioner

¶40

v/s.

¶41

The Chairman, Maharashtra Vidya Vikas Mahamandal, having his office at S.K.Pantwalvalkar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶42

:4:

¶43

Headmaster, S.K.Pant-Walawalkar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶44

Education Inspector, Greater Bombay-North Region, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Churchgate, Bombay-400 020.

¶45

Director of Education (Schools) having his offie at Central Building, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-1.

¶46

Smt.Manisha Shirke Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehrunagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶47

Mrs.Shinde S., Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶48

Mrs.Sapule, Assistant teacher in New English School, Bhandup, Bombay-400 024.

¶49

Shri Koyande, Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024. .. Respondents

¶50

Mr.Mihir Desai for the petitioner.

¶51

Shri C.S.Joshi for the respondent No.2.

¶52

Mr.P.M.Mokashi, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.

¶53

ALONGWITH

¶54

WRIT PETITION NO.372 OF 1993

¶55

:5:

¶56

Smt.Shubda Anant Patkar, residing at 32/B, Shriniwas Apartments, Manpada Road, Dombivli (East), Thane.

¶57

.. Petitioner

¶58

v/s.

¶59

The Chairman, Maharashtra Vidya Vikas Mahamandal, having his office at S.K.Pantwalvalkar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶60

Headmaster, S.K.Pant-Walawalkar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶61

Education Inspector, Greater Bombay-North Region, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Churchgate, Bombay-400 020.

¶62

Director of Education (Schools) having his offie at Central Building, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-1.

¶63

Smt.Manisha Shirke Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehrunagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶64

Mrs.Shinde S.,

¶65

Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶66

Mrs.Sapule, Assistant teacher in New English School, Bhandup, Bombay-400 024.

¶67

Shri Koyande, Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School,

¶68

:6:

¶69

Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024. .. Respondents

¶70

Mr.Mihir Desai for the petitioner.

¶71

Shri C.S.Joshi for the respondent No.2. Mr.P.M.Mokashi, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.

¶72

ALONGWITH

¶73

WRIT PETITION NO.373 OF 1993

¶74

Smt.Ashwini Ashok Khandekar, residing at 70/557, Pratiksha Nagar, Sion Koliwada, Bombay-400 027.

¶75

.. Petitioner

¶76

v/s.

¶77

The Chairman, Maharashtra Vidya Vikas Mahamandal, having his office at S.K.Pantwalvalkar Madhymik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶78

Headmaster, S.K.Pant-Walawalkar Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶79

Education Inspector, Greater Bombay-North Region, Office of Deputy Director of Education, Churchgate, Bombay-400 020.

¶80

Director of Education (Schools) having his offie at Central Building, Bhandarkar Road, Pune-1.

¶81

Smt.Manisha Shirke Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School,

¶82

:7:

¶83

Nehrunagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶84

Mrs.Shinde S., Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024.

¶85

Mrs.Sapule, Assistant teacher in New English School, Bhandup, Bombay-400 024.

¶86

Shri Koyande, Assistant teacher in S.K.Pant Walawalkar High School, Nehru Nagar, Kurla (East), Bombay-400 024. .. Respondents

¶87

Mr.Mihir Desai for the petitioner.

¶88

Shri C.S.Joshi for the respondent No.2.

¶89

Ms.S.M.Dandekar, Assistant Government Pleader for the State.

¶90

CORAM : R.M.LODHA AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ.

¶91

DATED : 12th August, 2005

¶92

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R.M.Lodha, J.)

¶93

This group of five writ petitions involves the identical issues and, therefore, all these matters

¶94

were taken up together and are being disposed of by

¶95

this common judgment.

¶96

2.		The	grievance	of the	se	five	petitione	rs	relate
to	their		claim to	trained	gradu	ate	scale	from	the
date		they	acquired	graduati	on	and	all		consequential
and	subs	equent	benefits	in	cluding		yearly		increments,

¶97

:8:

¶98

arrears on account of pay difference and revised pay

¶99

fixation and promotion to senior grade.

¶100

WRIT PETITION NO.365 OF 1993

¶101

3.	Th	e peti	tio	ner	in	this writ		petitio	n was
appointed		as			assistant	teacher in P	ant		Walawalkar
Secondary		School			run	by the first	resp	ondent	with
effect		from			18.9.1979	in the unde	rgrad	uate	scale.
At	the	time			of her	appointment, she		was	S.S.C.,
D.Ed.		Later	o	n	in	the year 1981,		she	acquired

¶102

qualification of B.A. In the year 1995, she

¶103

acquired qualification of B.Ed.

¶104

WRIT PETITION NO.367 OF 1993

¶105

4.	The pet	itioner	in	th	is	writ peti	tion was
appointed	as		assistant	teacher	in	Pant	Walawalkar
Secondary	School		with	effect	from	20.6.1974.	She
was	S.S.C.	D.Ed.		at the	time	of hear	appointment.
In the	year	1982,	she	acquir	ed	qualification	of B.A.

¶106

In the year 1995, she acquired qualification of

¶107

B.Ed.

¶108

WRIT PETITION NO.371 OF 1993

¶109

5. The	petitioner in	this	writ	petition	was

¶110

:9:

¶111

appointed		as	assistant	teacher	in	Pant		Wala	walkar
Secondary		School	with	effect		from	5.7.1	979	in
undergraduate		scale.	She	was	S.S.C.,	D.Ed.		at	the
time	of	her	appointment.	In	the	year	1985,	she	got

¶112

the degree of B.A. She acquired B.Ed. in the year

¶113

¶114

WRIT PETITION NO.372 OF 1993

¶115

6. The	petiti	oner	in	this	writ	petition		was
appointed	as		assistant	teacher in	Pant		Wala	walkar
Secondary	School		with	effect from	4.8.1975	in		the
undergraduate	scale.		At	the	time	of		her
appointment,	she	was	S.S.C.,	D.Ed.	Later	on	in	the

¶116

year 1982, she became graduate (B.A.). She got the

¶117

degree of B.Ed. in the year 1994.

¶118

WRIT PETITION NO.373 OF 1993

¶119

7. The	petitio	ner	in this	writ	petition	was
appointed	as	assis	tant teacher in	Pant		Walawalkar
Secondary	School	with	effect from	12.6.1978	in	the
undergraduate	scale.		At the	time	of	her
appointment,	she	was	S.S.C., D.Ed.	In	the	year

¶120

1982, she got the degree of B.A. She acquired

¶121

degree of B.Ed. in the year 1996.

¶122

:10:

¶123

8. upon	The case set up by these petitioners is having become graduate they became eligible	that for
promotion	to the graduate scale on the basis	of
their	seniority. As per the Grant-in-Aid	policy,
25%	of the total teaching staff in the	secondary
school	can be placed in the graduate scale if	they
are	trained graduates and if they fall in	the
category	of senior most 25% teachers.	The
petitioners	took up the matter with the	concerned
authorities	for getting their pay fixed in	the
trained	graduate scale from the date they	acquired
graduation	(B.A.). According to them by	the
circular	dated 9.7.1987 issued by the Director	of
Education	(Schools), it was made clear that	the
trained	graduate teachers who are already in	service
be	placed in the trained graduate scale and	given
teaching	work of VIII standard and above on	the
basis	of their seniority as soon as vacancy	arises
in the	quote of 25%. The petitioners submit t	hat in
the	said circular dated 9.7.1987 it was also	stated
that	the outside teachers recruited from open	market
should	not be appointed directly on the posts	in
quota	of 25% trained graduate scale and only	those
who a	re in service should be promoted to the	trained
graduate	scale in their order of seniority. Al	l the
above	petitioners took up the matter with	the
Managemen	t (respondent No.1). The	Education

¶124

:11:

¶125

Inspector	(respondent No.3)	vide	his	letter	dated
27.4.1992	directed the Man	agement		to send	the
proposal	of placing the	petitioners	in	the	trained
graduate	scale in accordance	with	the	Rules.	To
their	great dismay instead		of	giving	trained
graduate	scale to the	petitio	ners,	the re	spondent
No.1	appointed respondent	Nos.5,6,7	and	8 and	put
them	in the 25% trained	gradu	ate	scale ignoring	the
claim	of the petitioners.	Agg	rieved	thereby,	as
indicated	above, the p	etitioners	have	filed	these

¶126

five writ petitions claiming their graduate scale

¶127

from the date they acquired graduation.

¶128

9.	The petitioners	claim is contested	by	the
respondents.	In the	reply affidavit filed o	n	behalf
of the	respondent Nos.3	and 4, the case has	been	set
up that	as per	the provisions of	Ma	harashtra
Employees	of Private	Schools (Conditions of		Service)
Rules,	1981, the as	sistant teachers are appoi	nted	to
teach	the students from	standard V to VII. 75	%	of
those	are required	to be appointed in		trained
undergraduate	scale a	nd 25% in trained		graduate
scale.	Those assi	stant teachers who possess	at	the
time	of their	appointment graduate		trained
qualifications	and are	appointed to teach V to		VII
standard	in trained	undergraduate scale as well		as
those	trained u	ndergraduate teachers appointed		to

¶129

:12:

¶130

teach		V	to VII standard after th	eir a	p		pointment
obtain		grad	uate qualifications, such t	eachers			are
entitled		on	the basis of their seniori	ty to			be
upgraded		to	the trained graduate scale	in the			quote
of	25%	of	the total assistant teachers	appointe	d		for
V	to	VII	standards. Such assistant	teachers			holding
trained		graduate	qualifications and who	are			entitled
on	the	basis	of the seniority for appoi	ntment	in		the
trained	gr	aduate	scale of 25% of the quote	can		b	e so
appointed		in	the said quota as and	when			vacancy
arises	in	the	said quota. It is stated	that	a	ll	the
five		petitione	rs have been upgraded to	the			trained
graduate		scale	during the pendency of	the			writ
petition.			As regards respondent Nos.5 to	8, it			is
stated		that	as they fulfilled	the			eligibility

¶131

criteria, their appointment in the trained graduate

¶132

scale was approved.

¶133

10.	The	respon	dent Nos.1 and 2 (the Management	and
the Head	master	of	the School) have set up the	case
that as	per		the circulars dated 15.6.1984	and
9.7.1987,	issued	by	the respondent Nos.3 and 4	and
the qualific	ation	of	the petitioners, they have	been
given	trained	gr	aduate scale during the pendency	of
the writ	petition		when the vacancy arose. Ac	cording
to the	respo	ndent	Nos.1 and 2, the eligibility	and
qualification	for		trained graduate scale is	B.Ed.

¶134

:13:

¶135

and	the cla	im of	the	petitioners for the grant	of
trained	graduate	scale	from	the date they	acquired
ordinary	graduation	is	misc	onceived. The r	espondent
Nos.1	and 2	have	also	set up the case	that
respondent	Nos.5	to	8	were appointed from	outside
looking	to	their	qualifica	tion and expertise in	the
subjects	and	their	appointm	ent was duly approved	by
the	Education Au	thorities.		In so far as p	etitioners
are	concerned,	they	were	only graduates either	in
Marathi,	Sociol	ogy,	History	and Economics and	could
not	teach	subjects		like Mathematics,	Physics,
Chemistry	and,	there	fore,	teachers from open	market

¶136

were required	and the respondent Nos.5 to 8 were
appointed acc	ordingly.
11.	We heard the	learned	cou	nsel for	the
petitioners,	the learned	counsel	for	the	respondent
Nos.1 and 2	and the learned Assistant Government
Pleader.
12.	The Maharashtra	Employees	of	Private	Schools
Rules,	1981 prescribes the	quali	fication	for	trained

¶137

teachers in the secondary schools. The said

¶138

qualification as prescribed in the Rules is thus-

¶139

A	Bachelor’s	degree	in Teaching	or
Education	of		any	statutory
University	or		a	qualification
recognised	by Government	as

¶140

:14:

¶141

equivalent thereto;

¶142

[ii)	A Teaching Diplom	a of any	statutory
	University, if a is appointed for before the 1st continues to serve as a teacher with or without break after that date.	person holding the first October 1970	it time and
(iii)	A Secondary Teach	ers’ Certificate	of
	the Education	Department	of
	Maharashtra State, if holding it is first time before 1970 and continues teacher with or without break after that date];	a appointed for the 1st to serve as	person the October a
(iv)	A Diploma in Education of the Graduates Basic Training Centres;

¶143

A Diploma in Physica qualification recog	l Education nised	or a by
Government as	equivalent	thereto;
or Bifocal Higher	Diploma	in
Physical Education of	the	Government
of Maharashtra as	Physical	Education
with one of the	method subj	ects) or
B.P.Ed. (Marath	wada Universi	ty) or
B.P.Ed. (Shivaji	University)	or
B.Ed. (Physical	Education)	(Poona
University) or	B.Ed.	(Physical
Education)(Bombay Univ	ersity)	[or
B.P.Ed. (Nagpur	University)]	or
Diploma in	Physical	Education,
Culture and Recr	eation awarded	by
Hanuman Vyayam Prasarak Mandal, Amravati;

¶144

¶145

	(vi)	any	other	degree,	diploma	or
		certificate Inter as equivalent qualifications.	Uni to any of the "	which versity above	Government or Board may	the sanction
13.	As	already	indicated	by	us, these	five
petitioners	acqu	ired B.Ed.		in the	year 1993,	1994,
1995	and	1996.	The	case of	the petitioners	that

¶146

:15:

¶147

they	were entitled to	the	categ	ory	of	trained
graduate	teachers from	the	date		they	acquired
ordinary	graduation (i.e.	B.A.)		as	they	were
already	holding diploma in	the	edu	cation,	is	wholly
misconcei	ved. Before the	petitio	ners	can	be	placed
in	the trained graduate	scale,	they	have	to	be
trained	graduate teacher	first	which		they	could
have	only after they	acq	uired		B.Ed.	The

¶148

petitioners’ claim of trained graduate scale from

¶149

the date they got B.A., thus, cannot be accepted.

¶150

14.		The petitioners’	chall	enge to	the a	ppointment
of	respondent	Nos.5 to	8	as	trained	graduate
teachers	in	the traine	d gr	aduate scale	is	also
wholly	miscon	ceived. It	is	not in	dispute	that
these	four	respondents	were	appointed	as	trained
graduate	teac	hers in the	year	1992.	At that	time,
none	of	these petitioners	had	acquired	B.Ed.	and,

¶151

therefore, were not eligible to be appointed as

¶152

trained graduate teachers.

¶153

15.	It	is	the	case	of	the	respo	ndent	Nos.3	and	4
and	that is		not	dispu	ted	by	the		petitioners	that	as
per	the		provisio	ns	of	Ma	harashtr	a	Empl	oyees	of
Private	Sch	ools		(Cond	itions		of		Service)		Rules,
1981,	the		assistan	t te	achers	w	ho	are	appoin	ted	to
teach	the	stu	dents	from	stand	ard	V	to	VII,	75%	of

¶154

:16:

¶155

those should be appointed in trained und	ergraduate
scale and 25% to be appointed in trained	graduate
scale. It is not in dispute that all the	five
petitioners were appointed in the	trained
undergraduate scale and they fell in the	category
of 75% appointees. The circulars and the	policy
issued by the respondent Nos.3 and 4 that	trained
undergraduate teachers appointed to teach V to	VII
standards upon their acquiring the qualification	of
trained graduate teacher, such teachers	are
entitled to be upgraded to trained graduate	scale
in the quota of 25% of the total assistant	teachers
appointed for V to VII standard is not in	question.
But before us are no details of the	teachers
covered by the 75% of the trained graduate	scale
and 25% of the trained graduate scale. These	facts
have not been placed by any of the parties. As	a
matter of fact, it was incumbent upon	the
petitioners to place before the court the	strength
of teachers (75% trained undergraduate and	25%
trained graduate) approved in the schools run	by
the respondent No.1. The details of the	teachers
who were appointed in the trained und	ergraduate
scale and the details of those who were	appointed
to trained graduate scale are not available.	The
petitioners have not even chosen to place on	record
the seniority list of the trained und	ergraduate

¶156

:17:

¶157

scale	teachers	of the	relevant	years	.	Thei	r claim,
thus,	that	upon	hav	ing	obta	ined	graduate
qualificat	ion,	they were	entitled	on	the	basis	of
their seni	ority to be upg	raded to trained gradu	ate
scale is n	ot founded on a	ny material.
16.	It	is not	in	dispute	that	all	these
petitioner	s have now be	en granted trained gra	duate
scale as a	nd when vacan	cy occurred.
17.	For	all these	reasons,	we	are	satisfied	that
no	interfe	rence is	called	for	in	the	extraordinary

¶158

jurisdiction. These five writ petitions are

¶159

dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶160

(R.M.LODHA, J.)

¶161

(J.P. DEVADHAR, J.)

Smt.v.v.Parulekar. v. Maha Vidya Vikas Maha Mandal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Smt.v.v.Parulekar. v. Maha Vidya Vikas Maha Mandal and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr.v.W.Deshpande and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Park Remedies. Vs Union of India and Ors.

Shri Devdasan Devamani. Vs Jam Manufacturing Mills (U.C.) and Anr.

M/S.Ganesh Construction Corpn. and Ors. Vs the B.M.C. of Gr. Bombay

Prabhakar K.Markar and Ors. Vs Mun.Corpn.of Gr.Bombay and Ors.

Brij Kishore M.Halwai and Ors. Vs the Munici.Corpn.of Gr. Bombay.