Allowed

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Sept 2015WP/6123/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order rejecting the Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust's appointment proposals as Shikshan Sevek. The Court held that a Government Resolution applicable to non-teaching staff is not applicable to petitioners' cases without first addressing the minority institution issue, directing respondents to reconsider within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Order dated 13.04.2015 passed by Respondent No.3-Education Officer is quashed and set aside; respondents directed to consider cases within eight weeks.

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

dgm 1 12-wp-6120, 6122 and 6123-15.sxw

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION No. 6120 OF 2015

¶5

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali, through its President/Secretary .... Petitioner

¶6

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary and ors. .... Respondents

¶8

ALONG WITH

¶9

WRIT PETITION No. 6122 OF 2015

¶10

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali, through its President/Secretary .... Petitioner

¶11

¶12

The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary and ors. .... Respondents

¶13

AND ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION No. 6123 OF 2015

¶14

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali, through its President/Secretary .... Petitioner vs The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary and ors. .... Respondents

¶15

Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the petitioners in all Petitions. Ms. S.S. Bhende, AGP for respondent/State in all Petitions.

¶16

1/4

¶17

dgm 2 12-wp-6120, 6122 and 6123-15.sxw

¶18

CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA AND A. A. SAYED, JJ.

¶19

DATE : September 01, 2015

¶20

ORDER:

¶21

Rule, returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent.

¶22

2 We are inclined to dispose of the present Petitions as Respondent No.3-Education Officer, Zilla Parishad,Sindhudurg, rejected the proposal for approval of appointment of the Petitioners as Shikshan Seveks in Petitioner No.1-School mainly by referring to Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015 which has foundation of Government Resolution dated 23 October 2013 referring to non-teaching staff which, in our view, and even otherwise, is not applicable to Petitioners' cases for such purpose. Therefore, without expressing anything on merits and solely on this ground and by keeping all points open, order dated 13.04.2015 passed by Respondent No.3-Education Officer is quashed and set aside. We direct the Respondents to consider the cases of Petitioners/proposals in accordance with law including the issue with regard to the minority institution as early as possible and preferably within eight weeks. The writ petitions are disposed of,

¶23

2/4

¶24

dgm 3 12-wp-6120, 6122 and 6123-15.sxw

¶25

with liberty.

¶26

3 Rule in all the Petitions made absolute accordingly, with

¶27

liberty.

¶28

4 No costs.

¶29

(A. A. SAYED, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

¶30

3/4

¶31

dgm 4 12-wp-6120, 6122 and 6123-15.sxw

¶32

C E R T I F I C A T E

¶33

“ I certify that this Judgment/Order uploaded is a

¶34

true and correct copy of original signed Judgment/Order.”

¶35

Uploaded by :D. G. MURUMKAR, Senior Private

¶36

Secretary to Hon’ble Judge

¶37

Uploaded on : 02/09/2015

¶38

4/4

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary 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

Anand Bhaurao Meshram Vs Union of India and 11 Ors.

Shri. Vishwaskumar Vithal Ghodke Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mrs. Diksha Dattatray Tendulkar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School Education Dept and Ors.

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

The Sindhudurg Diocesan Educational Trust, Kankavali through Its President/Secretary and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.