Allowed

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale v. the Education Officer and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Nov 2017WP/11732/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court allowed the writ petition directed at the Education Officer and other respondents. The Court held that an order withholding approval of the petitioner's appointment was erroneous because the petitioner held a Scheduled Tribe post while challengers contested an OBC post. The Court directed immediate approval of the appointment as Shikshan Sevak.

What did the court decide?

Respondents directed to grant approval of petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak w.e.f. 17.8.2011 and Assistant Teacher after 3 years; salary arrears to be cleared within 3 months.

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale Vs the Education… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

Rane

¶2

1/4 * WP-11732-2015 (SR. 12) Monday, 27.11.2017

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 11732 OF 2015

¶6

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale ….Petitioner V/s. The Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Ratnagiri and Ors. ….Respondents

¶7

Ms. Kumud A. Bhatia, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶8

Mr. C.P. Yadav, AGP for respondents no.1, 2 and 5.

¶9

Smt. S.N. Potdar, Advocate for respondent no.7.

¶10

Mr. S.A. Mane, Advocate for respondent no.4.

¶11

CORAM :- B.R.GAVAI & SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ. DATE :- 27TH NOVEMBER, 2017.

¶12

P.C. :-

¶13

Rule. Rule, made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent of Learned Counsel appearing for the parties.

¶14

Rane * 2/4 * WP-11732-2015 (SR. 12) Monday, 27.11.2017

¶15

By way of present petition, the petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to respondents no.1 and 2 to grant approval to his appointment as Shikshan Sevak” w.e.f. 17^th August, 2013.

¶16

Perusal of the record would reveal that, on a vacancy arising on account of retirement of one, Salvi, a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe was available in the School run by the respondent no.3, Management. On the said post, the petitioner came to be appointed as “Shikshan Sevak”. Vide order dated 17^th August, 2011, however, respondent no.1 rejected approval on the ground that, one Priyanka Bhatade was appointed against the post reserved for OBC had filed an appeal challenging her termination before the Learned School Tribunal.

¶17

The appeal filed by the said, Priyanka Bhatade has been subsequently dismissed vide judgment and order dated 28^th August, 2012 by the Learned School Tribunal.

¶18

Rane * 3/4 * WP-11732-2015 (SR. 12) Monday, 27.11.2017

¶19

It is informed that a petition challenging the said order is pending before this Court.

¶20

In any case, we find that since the petitioner's appointment is against the post reserved for Scheduled Tribe and said Priyanka Bathade's claim is against the post reserved for OBC, there was no justification in withholding the grant of approval to the petitioner's appointment. We are of the considered view that the order passed by respondent no.1 dated 1^st December, 2011 is on erroneous basis.

¶21

In the result, the petition is allowed. Respondents no.1 and 2 are directed to grant approval to

¶22

the appointment of the petitioner as “Shikshan Sevak” w.e.f. 17^th August, 2011 and upon completion of three years tenure as a “Shikshan Sevak” grant approval to his services as an “Assistant Teacher”.

¶23

Rane

¶24

4/4 * WP-11732-2015 (SR. 12) Monday, 27.11.2017

¶25

Needless to state that the salary be paid to the

¶26

petitioner as an “Assistant Teacher” from the month of December, 2017 and all arrears in pursuance of the aforesaid order shall be cleared within three months from today.

¶27

(SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J) (B.R. GAVAI, J)

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale v. the Education Officer and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale v. the Education Officer 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

Shri Sadanand Krishnarao Bhosale Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Smt. Mahejaan Ashfak Ahmed Shaikh Vs the New Education Institute through Chairman and Ors.

Ombase Raghunath Pandurang Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Sanjay Gularam Sabale Vs the Education Officer and Ors.

Sharad Narayan Amate Vs Radhanagari Mahavidyalay through Its Principal and Ors.

Sudyumna Sudeep Nargolkar Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.