Quashed

Sambhaji Vasantrao Shinde v. Rural Education Society Murud through President and Others

Bombay HC28 Jan 2020WP/768/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This judgment quashed an order cancelling approval for a teacher's transfer from unaided to aided post, directing the Education Officer to verify post availability before deciding on the transfer.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order is quashed and set aside; the respondents are directed to consider the availability of posts and grant approval if applicable within three months.

Sambhaji Vasantrao Shinde Vs Rural Education Society… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

66wp768o19

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.768 OF 2019

¶5

SAMBHAJI VASANTRAO SHINDE

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

RURAL EDUCATION SOCIETY MURUD THROUGH PRESIDENT AND OTHERS

¶8

Advocate for Petitioner : Shri Mayur V. Salunke h/f Shri Salunke V.D. AGP for Respondents 3 and 4 / State : Shri S.P.Tiwari Advocate for Respondents 1 and 2 : Shjri Bhausaheb B. Bhise

¶9

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA

¶10

¶11

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶12

DATE :- 28^th January, 2020

¶13

Per Court :-

¶14

1 The learned counsel submits that this petitioner is transferred from unaided to aided post. The Education Officer approved the transfer of the petitioner from unaided to aided post. The learned counsel submits that the appointment of the petitioner on unaided post was also approved by the Education Officer. The approval was granted by the Education Officer on 23.12.2015. The respondents under letter dated 28.12.2015 canceled the said approval and same was communicated to the petitioner first time on 28.11.2018. The learned counsel submits that the transfer from unaided to aided is permissible.

¶15

2 66wp768o19

¶16

2 The learned AGP submits that at the relevant time

¶17

the proposal seeking approval to the appointment of the other teachers of the petitioner institution on grant in aid basis was also pending. The posts sanctioned were only 55, however, without considering the same, the approval was granted. The learned AGP further contents that large number of surplus candidates are to be absorbed.

¶18

3 According to the learned counsel for the Management, the staffing pattern is subsequently corrected and now the sanctioned posts are 63.

¶19

4 We have under our order dated 04.07.2019 in Writ Petition No.1493/2018 laid down the guidelines for grant of approval to transfers from unaided to aided posts. The respondents would not be in a position to raise the plea of surplus teachers. Of course, the respondents will have to consider the availability of posts and the roster.

¶20

5 Considering the above, impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondents shall consider about the availability of post on which the petitioner is appointed and if the aided post to which the petitioner is transfered is available, the respondents shall grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner.

¶21

6 In case, the approval is granted in favour of the petitioner, the consequences would follow. The same shall be done by the

¶22

¶23

66wp768o19

¶24

Education Officer within THREE months from today. Writ petition

¶25

is, accordingly , disposed of. No costs.

¶26

(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )

¶27

kps

Sambhaji Vasantrao Shinde v. Rural Education Society Murud through President and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sambhaji Vasantrao Shinde v. Rural Education Society Murud through President 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

Harish Thakardas Rizwani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Mandal through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Mandal Aurangabad through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Narendra Arjun Mahire Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

M/S Nagina Herbal through Its Proprietor Syed Naimuddin Ahteshamuddin Vs the Nashik Merchant Co. Operative Bank Ltd. and Others

Suraj Girdharsing Rajput Vs Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Mumbai and Others