Allowed

Jyoti Ravindra Wayal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC23 Sept 2021WP/6373/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court set aside the refusal to grant approval for the petitioner's compassionate appointment as a Safai Kamgar. Citing recent Supreme Court rulings, the Court held that staffing pattern bans do not preclude such appointments, directing the Education Officer to approve the post from 15.01.2018.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 01.02.2018 issued by the Education Officer was quashed and set aside as prayed for in prayer clause (D). The Officer directed to grant approval with effect from 15.01.2018.

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

¶1

901-wp-6373-2018.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

901 WRIT PETITION NO.6373 OF 2018

¶4

JYOTI RAVINDRA WAYAL VERSUS

¶5

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. V.S. Panpatte h/f Mr. Bali Harish S. AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 : Mr. S.B. Yawalkar

¶7

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & S.G. MEHARE, J.J. DATED : 23^rd SEPTEMBER, 2021

¶8

PER COURT:-

¶9

We had extensively heard the learned counsel for the respective sides on 16.09.2021. Since this Court has taken a view, in the light of the judgments delivered by the Hon’ble Apex Court, in it’s judgment dated 11.08.2021 in Writ Petition No.4219 of 2018 fled by Smt. Yogita Shivsing Nikam Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others, we had adjourned this matter to enable the learned AGP to go through the said judgment and state, whether the law laid down therein would apply to the case in hand. Today, the learned AGP submits that this Court has settled the issue that any ban on recruitment or pendency of the stafng pattern of the non-teaching staf, would not afect the compassionate appointments.

¶10

We also fnd that the State of Maharashtra has issued a Government Resolution dated 15.11.2014 in the light of the order passed by this Court at the Nagpur Bench in matters of recruitment of

¶11

1/3

¶12

901-wp-6373-2018.odt

¶13

Safai Kamgar in place of the retiring or deceased parent in the light of the Lad-Page committee recommendations, wherein the State has taken a positive stand that the stafng pattern would not apply to such candidates who have to be appointed as Safai Kamgar on the basis of the Vashila Paddhat.

¶14

It is, therefore, obvious that the State of Maharashtra has carved out certain areas wherein appointments would not be afected by the stafng pattern.

¶15

In the case in hand, the husband of the petitioner died on 02.12.2017. The petitioner was rendered a widow at the age of 27 years. She applied for compassionate appointment on 12.01.2018. Respondent no.3, Educational Society passed a resolution on 14.01.2018 appointing the petitioner on compassionate grounds. By the order dated 01.02.2018, the Education Ofcer refused to grant approval on the ground that there was a ban on recruitment of nonteaching staf and the stafng pattern was yet not formalieed.

¶16

The petitioner has put-forth prayer clause (B), (C) and (D)

¶17

as under:

¶18

“B. It may pleased be held and declare that, the Government Resolution dated 12.02.2015 issued by the State Government through its School Education Department imposed and continued the ban on compassionate ground are ultra virus article 14 of the Constitution of India and the same may please be struck down.

¶19

C. In the alternate, take place by held and declare that the

¶20

2/3

¶21

901-wp-6373-2018.odt

¶22

Government Resolution dated 12.02.2015 issued by the State Government through its School Education Department imposing ban on compassionate employment in the aided or unaided school run by the private institution are not applicable, by appropriate writ or direct, as the case may be.

¶23

D. By writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or directions in the like nature, the order dated 01.02.2018 issued by the Respondent No.2 – Education Ofcer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Jalna, (Exhibit “H”) may kindly be quashed and set aside.”

¶24

Since the Government Resolution dated 12.02.2015 issued by School Education Department does not impose a ban on compassionate appointments, the learned advocate for the petitioner does not press prayer clause (B) and (C).

¶25

In view of the above and the law laid down by this Court in the judgment dated 11.08.2021 in Smt. Yogita Shivsing Nikam and Sachin Shivajirao Suryawanshi (supra), this petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (D). Consequentially, respondent no.2, Education Ofcer shall issue the approval to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds with efect from 15.01.2018 when she joined employment with respondent no.3 within three weeks from today.

¶26

(S.G. MEHARE. J.)

¶27

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶28

Mujaheed//

¶29

3/3

Jyoti Ravindra Wayal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jyoti Ravindra Wayal 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Tuljamata Education Society through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Tuljamata Education Society through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

The Ex. Engineer, Girna Cannel Renovation Division- 2, Jalgaon and Anr. Vs Chandrakant Sitaram Patil and Ors.

Dr Mohan Vaijanathrao Buke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Trimbak Ganpati Sanap Vs Indian Oil Corporation Limited and Another

Beldar Shaikh Faheem Shaikh Ismail Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others