The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, dismissed a writ petition claiming benefits for para-teachers under a 2009 Government Resolution. The court held that petitioners who resigned or were terminated after enquiry had no rights under the scheme.
Writ petition dismissed with no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD
|
Office Notes, Office|
||
|---|---|
|Memoranda of Coram,||
Court's or Judge's orders|
|appearances, Court's|||
|orders or directions|||
|and Registrar's orders|||
|
W|___________________________________
RIT PETITION NO.1414 OF 2017|
KARMSING RUPJI WASAWE AND OTHERS VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr.V.D. Sapkal. AGP for Respondent/State: Mr.C.S. Kulkarni. Advocate for R.Nos.3 and 5 : Mr.R.N. Jain.
...
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA & V.L. ACHLIYA,JJ.
Dated: DECEMBER,18, 2017
Mr.Sapkal, learned Advocate for the petitioners submits that the petitioners were initially appointed as Swyanmsevaks in the year, 2002 under the “Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan” scheme. The petitioners have passed 12th Standard. The petitioners worked from 2002 to 2007 under the scheme. The school was not transferred from “ wasti shala ” to school under “ Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan ” scheme. The petitioners are entitled for the benefit of para-teacher. The learned Advocate relies on the Government Resolution dated 5th February, 2009.
1414.17wp
2
2.The learned Advocate for Respondent
Nos.3 and 5 submits that the petitioner
Nos.1 and 2 had resigned and petitioner
No.3 was terminated after holding an
enquiry.
3.As the petitioner Nos.1 and 2 have
resigned on their own volition and
petitioner No.3 was terminated after an
enquiry, the petitioners would certainly
have no right to claim benefit of the
Government Resolution dated 5th February,
2009.
4.Writ Petition as such stands
dismissed with no costs.
(V.L.ACHLIYA,J) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J)
kadam/
1 issue framed by the court
Whether petitioners who resigned or were terminated are entitled to benefits under the Government Resolution dated 5th February, 2009.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Karmsing Rupji Wasawe and Others
The State of Maharashtra and Others
S.V. Gangapurwala
V.L. Achliya
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court