Allowed

Ganesh Ankush Pawar and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC24 Oct 2016WP/2232/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed by two school teachers seeking direction to release salary payable since July 2015. The High Court held that since appointments were approved and served at a grant-in-aid school, salary must be paid pending the outcome of the proposed inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to release salary payable from July 2015 and continue monthly salary subject to inquiry report results; arrears to be paid within one month.

Ganesh Ankush Pawar and Another Vs the State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

wp223216.odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2232 OF 2016

¶5

1	Shri Ganesh s/o Ankush Pawar age 29 years, occ. Service
2	Shri Shrikant s/o Bharat Gawali age 23 years, occ. Service
	Both r/o Vasantrao Naik Secondary Ashram School, Pimplagaon(Amba) Tq. & Dist. Latur	Petitioner
	Versus
1	The State of Maharashtra Through its Secretary Social Welfare Department Maharashtra State, Mantralaya, Mumbai 32
2	The Director, V.J.N.T., OBC and SBC Department, Maharashtra State, Pune
3	The Divisional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Latur, Division Latur.
4	The Assistant Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Latur.
5	Vasantrao Naik Secondary Ashram School Pimpalgaon(Amba) Tq. & Dist. Latur Through its Headmaster Res	pondents
Mr.	V.B. Jadhav, advocate for petitioners.
Mr.	K.N. Lokhande, A.G.P. for Respondents 1 to 4.
Mr.	S.R. Shirsat, advocate for respondent no. 5.

¶6

wp223216.odt

¶7

{2}

¶8

CORAM : R.M.BORDE &

¶9

K.K.SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 24th October, 2016

¶10

ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J.)

¶11

1 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by consent of learned Counsel for respective parties.

¶12

2 Petitioners are praying for issuance of directions to the Respondents to release salary payable to them since July 2015 till this date.

¶13

3 Petitioners are working in Respondent No.5-School since 2010. Appointments of petitioners, made in the year 2010, have been approved by Respondent No.3-Divisional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Latur Division, Latur. Initially, the Social Welfare Department accorded approval to the appointment of petitioners provisionally for the academic years 2010-2011, 2011-2012, 2012-2013 and 2013-2014. By issuing an order on 29.03.2015, Respondent No.3-Divisional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Latur Division, Latur, accorded permanent approval to the appointment of petitioners from 01.06.2014 onwards and has also granted them continuity in service. Respondent-State, however, has taken a decision to absorb surplus teaching and non teaching staff and not to grant approval to new appointments unless surplus teaching and non teaching staff is absorbed. According to the Respondents, strength of surplus non teaching staff in the Latur division was more than 22 and as such Respondent No.1 – Director of VJNT, OBC and SBC, Maharashtra State, Pune, on 01.10.2015, issued a letter

¶14

{3}

¶15

wp223216.odt

¶16

directing Respondent No.2 to withdraw the approval of employees who are appointed after 16.10.2012. It has also been directed to stop salary of employees whose appointments are contrary to Government Resolution dated 16.10.2012. It is further stated that on scrutiny of the relevant record, it is revealed that the Management, while appointing petitioners, has not followed the procedure laid down in Government Resolution dated 16.10.2012. It is also contended that no prior permission was obtained before publishing advertisement inviting applications for filling up the vacancies. It is stated that inquiry is contemplated in the matter and after receipt of report in respect of proposed inquiry, appropriate decision as regards approval granted to the petitioners would be taken.

¶17

4 It must be noted that as on today, petitioners are rendering their services in Respondent No.5-school and that their appointments have been approved by the competent authority. It is also worth to be taken note of that till this date, approval to the appointment of petitioners has not been withdrawn. In this view of the matter, since petitioners are in employment and their services have been approved by the competent authority. Until any adverse decision is taken in observance of the procedure prescribed, Respondents are not justified in stopping salary payable to the petitioners. It would be open for the Respondents to adopt appropriate procedure and take suitable decision taking note of alleged irregularity caused in according approval to the appointment of petitioners. It is also expected of the Respondents to extend opportunity of hearing to the petitioners since the adverse decision is likely to affect their right in respect of

¶18

{4}

¶19

wp223216.odt

¶20

continuance in service. Respondents are under an obligation to pay salary to the petitioners as long as they are in service in Respondent No.5-school, which is receiving grant-in-aid from the State Government.

¶21

5 Writ Petition is, thus, allowed. Respondents are directed to release salary payable to the petitioners from the month of July 2015 and continue to pay monthly salary to them subject to the decision, which Respondents may take in furtherance of report of the proposed inquiry. The arrears of salary shall be paid to the petitioners within a period of one month from today.

¶22

6 Rule is accordingly made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.

¶23

K.K.SONAWANE JUDGE

¶24

R.M.BORDE

¶25

JUDGE

¶26

adb/wp223216

Ganesh Ankush Pawar and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Ankush Pawar and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

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

Furkhan Babu Patel Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kerbaji Gyanoji More Dead through His Widow Kamal Kerbaji More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Najmunnisa Nasrin Fazlur Raheman Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Radha Kacharu Ghodake Vs State of Maharashtra and Others

Ashthabhuja Bahu-Uddeshiy Shikshan Va Samajik Vikas Sanstha, Kalmeshwar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sandeep Pralhadrao Hublikar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others