Disposed

Ravindra Shriram Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC8 Oct 2018WP/9851/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single-judge Bench of Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench disposed of writ petition seeking salary for 2014-15 and absorption. Directs Education Officer to pay salary and list surplus teacher within six weeks and absorb when occasion arises.

What did the court decide?

directed de to disburse salary for 2014-15 within six weeks, enroll in surplus list and absorb per policy.

Ravindra Shriram Jadhav Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

9851.17wp

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.9851 OF 2017

¶5

Ravindra Shriram Jadhav, Age: 36 years, Occu: Nill, R/o: Dattanagar, Rampur Road, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded

¶6

..PETITIONER

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

The State of Maharashtra, Through Secretary Education Department (Primary), Maharashtra State Mantralaya, Mumbai-32

¶9

The Deputy Director of Education (Primary), Latur Division, Latur, Tal. & Dist. Latur

¶10

Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded, Tq. & Dist. Nanded ..RESPONDENTS

¶11

Mr J. V. Patil, Advocate holding for Mr P. R. Katneshwarkar, Advocate for petitioner;

¶12

Mr S. Y. Mahajan, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 & 2; Mr S. B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for respondent No.3

¶13

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND

¶14

MANISH PITALE, JJ.

¶15

DATE : 8th October, 2018

¶16

ORAL ORDER:

¶17

Heard learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner.

¶18

The petitioner is before this Court with prayer clauses (A) and (B).

¶19

9851.17wp

¶20

(2)

¶21

In the earlier round of petition, the petitioner was before this Court in Writ Petition No.4159 of 2013. By an order dated 6^th January, 2014, the Division Bench of this Court, by accepting an undertaking of the Education Officer by way of affidavit-in-reply, disposed of the said writ petition.

¶22

The facts which are not in dispute are that the petitioner was working in a school, namely, Anandbhavan Primary School, Khanapur, Tq. Degloor, Dist. Nanded in the year 2013. The petitioner was declared as surplus teacher and the recognition of the school wherein he was working was withdrawn. Thereafter, by an order dated 5^th September, 2014, the petitioner was absorbed in panchayat samiti school. It is the grievance of the petitioner that he worked in panchayat samiti school for academic year 2014-2015. The petitioner admitted that for academic year 2013-2014, he was not placed in any school. Thus, the limited grievance of the petitioner is, till date neither salary for the academic year 2014-2015 is paid to him nor any steps, namely, putting the petitioner in the list of surplus teachers and then accommodating him by absorbing in other school are taken by the respondents authorities.

¶23

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded, today placed on record the communication dated 8^th October, 2018. Same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification. It is submitted that Anandbhavan Primary

¶24

9851.17wp

¶25

(3)

¶26

School, Khanapur, Tq. Degloor is closed and the petitioner's name would be enlisted in the list of surplus teachers and the salary of the petitioner would be drawn by way of off-line procedure.

¶27

Considering the statement in communication dated 8^th October, 2018, we dispose of the present petition with directions to the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nanded to take all necessary steps so as to disburse the salary of the petitioner for academic year 2014-2015, as expeditiously as possible and not later than six weeks from the date of the order of this Court and then the Education Officer (Primary) also to take necessary steps for enlisting the name of the petitioner in the list of surplus teachers and then to absorb him as and when occasion will arise as per the policy of the State Government and the Rules prevailing to that effect. Needless to state that the Education Officer to verify the record so as to ascertain for what period the petitioner actually worked in academic year 2014-2015. The petition is disposed of.

¶28

(MANISH PITALE, J.)

¶29

(PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

¶30

sjk

Ravindra Shriram Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravindra Shriram Jadhav 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

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mahesh Vasantrao Kulkarni and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Nirmala Bhaginath Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vaishali Vijay Narwade and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Maheshkumar Radhakishan Gujar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Momin Khalid Ahmed Altaf Husain Vs the Collector Jalgaon and Others

Maheshkumar Radhakishan Gujar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another