Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Shri Vikram Vilas Mane, filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay challenging the refusal of grant of approval to his appointment as 'Shikshan Sevak' by the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur (respondent No.2) vide communication dated 20th April 2018. The refusal was based on the ground of ban on recruitment imposed by Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012. The petitioner was appointed by respondent No.3 (Shri Shivray Shikshan Prasarak Mandal) which runs an aided secondary school (respondent No.4). The post of Art Teacher became vacant on 20th February 2013 due to resignation of Ketan Hari Shinde. The school requested respondent No.2 on 10th June 2013 to grant permission to publish an advertisement to fill the vacancy, but respondent No.2 did not respond. The school then published an advertisement on 18th June 2013 and appointed the petitioner on 1st July 2013. The petitioner submitted his joining report and sought approval, but respondent No.2 refused approval on 20th April 2018 citing the ban. The court examined the Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012 and found that it imposed a ban on recruitment but with exceptions for vacancies arising prior to the ban. Since the vacancy arose on 20th February 2013, which is after the ban, the court considered whether the ban applied. The court noted that the school had sought permission before the ban but the Education Officer did not respond. The court held that the ban cannot be applied mechanically and that the Education Officer ought to have considered the request. The court allowed the petition, quashed the communication dated 20th April 2018, and directed respondent No.2 to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his appointment with all consequential benefits.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Appointment - Shikshan Sevak - Approval - Ban on Recruitment - Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012 - The petitioner challenged the refusal of approval to his appointment as Shikshan Sevak on the ground of ban on recruitment. The court held that the ban imposed by Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012 does not apply to vacancies that arose prior to the ban. Since the vacancy arose on 20th February 2013, which is after the ban, the court examined the facts and found that the school had sought permission to advertise before the ban but the Education Officer did not respond. The court directed the Education Officer to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment. (Paras 2-17)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the refusal of grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner as 'Shikshan Sevak' by the Education Officer on the ground of ban of recruitment vide Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012 is sustainable in law when the vacancy arose prior to the said ban.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the Writ Petition, quashed the communication dated 20th April 2018, and directed respondent No.2 to grant approval to the petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his appointment with all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Government Resolution dated 2nd May 2012 imposing ban on recruitment does not apply to vacancies that arose prior to the ban
- Education Officer cannot refuse approval on ground of ban if vacancy arose before ban
- Writ Petition maintainable against refusal of approval
