Allowed

Ranjeet Ravindra Ingole v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC3 Feb 2021WP/1936/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

One judge allowed writ petitions challenging appointments as Shikshan Sevaks after transfer from unaided posts. The court set aside orders ignoring prior unaided service, ordered re-consideration for Assistant Teacher grade eligibility, and mandated action within four months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned orders setting appointments as Shikshan Sevaks excluded are set aside; Education Officer directed to consider unaided service and act within four months.

Ranjeet Ravindra Ingole Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

1 909-wp 1916-2021+.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1916 OF 2021

¶4

Suraj Bhaskarrao Suryawanshi

¶5

.. Petitioner

¶6

Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶8

.. Respondents

¶9

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1936 OF 2021

¶10

Ranjeet Ravindra Ingole

¶11

.. Petitioner

¶12

Versus

¶13

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶14

.. Respondents

¶15

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2180 OF 2021

¶16

Vikas Shrishailya Waghmode .. Petitioner

¶17

Versus

¶18

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶19

WITH

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO. 2181 OF 2021

¶21

Ravikiran Kashinathrao Pawar .. Petitioner

¶22

Versus

¶23

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶24

WITH

¶25

WRIT PETITION NO. 2182 OF 2021

¶26

Sujeet Rambhau Chikundre .. Petitioner

¶27

Versus

¶28

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶29

1 of 4

¶30

2 909-wp 1916-2021+.odt

¶31

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2183 OF 2021

¶32

Sandip Nagnath Dudhbhate

¶33

.. Petitioner

¶34

Versus

¶35

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶36

.. Respondents

¶37

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2184 OF 2021

¶38

Balasaheb Vilasrao More

¶39

.. Petitioner

¶40

Versus

¶41

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶42

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2185 OF 2021

¶43

Shankar Rajendra Misal .. Petitioner

¶44

Versus

¶45

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶46

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2186 OF 2021

¶47

Prashant Rangrao Salunke .. Petitioner

¶48

Versus

¶49

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶50

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 2152 OF 2021 Rupesh Hariba Chavan .. Petitioner

¶51

Versus

¶52

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents

¶53

Mr. Santosh S. Jadhavar, Advocate for the Petitioners in all matters. Mrs. P. V. Diggikar, AGP for Respondents-State in all matters.

¶54

2 of 4

¶55

3 909-wp 1916-2021+.odt

¶56

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶57

DATED : 03^rd February, 2021.

¶58

PER COURT :-

¶59

. The petitioners in all these writ petitions were appointed on unaided posts. After working for some time they were transferred to aided posts. The approvals have been granted to the transfers of the petitioners on the aided posts, but while granting approval the Education Officer did not consider the services rendered by the petitioners on unaided posts.

¶60

The petitioners' services are approved as Shikshan Sevaks from the date of transfer to the aided posts. It appears that, the said order was passed relying on the circular dated 28.06.2016.

¶61

While considering the cases of the petitioners for grant of approval to the transfers of the petitioners on unaided posts, the services rendered on unaided posts will also have to be considered. To illustrate, if an employee has rendered two years of service on unaided post and thereafter transferred, then the said person will have to work as a Shikshan Sevak on the aided post for one year and if the employee has worked for three years and more on unaided post before his transfer to the aided post, then in that case, the transfer will have to be

¶62

3 of 4

¶63

4 909-wp 1916-2021+.odt

¶64

as an Assistant Teacher and not as a Shikshan Sevak.

¶65

We have under our judgment dated 04.07.2019 in Writ Petition No. 1493 of 2018 with connected matters held that some of the clauses of circular dated 28.06.2016 do not apply.

¶66

In the light of the above, the impugned orders to the extent of granting approval to the appointments of the petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks from the date of their transfer to the aided posts are set aside. The Education Officer shall consider the services rendered by the petitioners on unaided post and thereafter grant approval as observed above. The same shall be done expeditiously and preferably within a period of four (04) months from today.

¶67

Writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶68

( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI ) JUDGE

¶69

( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE

¶70

P.S.B.

¶71

4 of 4

Ranjeet Ravindra Ingole v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ranjeet Ravindra Ingole v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dinesh Shantaram Dhivare and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Swapnil Rajaram Patil and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Rajabhau Laxman Awad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Suraj Bhaskarrao Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Archana Narayanrao Sone and Anthter Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Another

Prashant Rangrao Salunke Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others