Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Smt. Bharti Manu Mandhora and Smt. Shubhangi Arvind Gadway, were appointed as primary school teachers in 1979 in a school run by Respondent No.3, New Education Society. In 2002-03, vacancies arose in Standards V to VII of the secondary section due to retirements. Being the seniormost primary teachers, they were entitled to transfer and were appointed as assistant teachers in the secondary section on 21st November 2002. The school sought approval for their appointments in the appropriate pay scale, considering their prior experience. However, on 13th December 2002, Respondent No.2, the Education Officer (Secondary), approved their employment as Shikshan Sevaks for a period of three years, ignoring their prior service. The petitioners challenged this order by way of a writ petition. The court considered the issue of whether the Education Officer could approve the appointment as Shikshan Sevaks when the petitioners had already been approved as assistant teachers and had served for over two decades. The court held that the impugned order was illegal and set it aside. It directed that the petitioners' appointments as assistant teachers in the secondary section be approved in the appropriate pay scale, counting their prior service from 1979. The court emphasized that the Shikshan Sevak scheme could not be applied to teachers who were already approved and had long service. The petition was allowed with no order as to costs.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Shikshan Sevak Scheme - Approval of Appointment - Prior Service - The Education Officer approved the petitioners' employment as Shikshan Sevaks for three years, ignoring their prior service as primary teachers since 1979 in the same school. The court held that the approval was illegal as the petitioners were already approved as assistant teachers and their transfer to the secondary section did not warrant a fresh appointment as Shikshan Sevaks. The prior service must be counted for pay scale fixation. (Paras 1-6)
B) Service Law - Transfer - Seniority - The petitioners, being senior primary teachers, were transferred to vacant posts in the secondary section. The court held that such transfer does not result in loss of seniority or prior service benefits. The approval as Shikshan Sevaks was contrary to the rules and the petitioners' rights. (Paras 2-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Education Officer could approve the appointment of teachers as Shikshan Sevaks ignoring their prior service as primary teachers in the same school, and whether such approval is valid.
Final Decision
The court allowed the writ petition, quashed the order dated 13th December 2002, and directed the Education Officer to approve the petitioners' appointments as assistant teachers in the secondary section in the appropriate pay scale, counting their prior service from 1979. No order as to costs.
Law Points
- Shikshan Sevak scheme
- approval of appointment
- counting of prior service
- pay scale fixation
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act
- 1977
Case Details
2006 LawText (BOM) (02) 10
WRIT PETITION NO.3594 OF 2003
V.G. Palshikar, Ag. C.J., Smt. Nishita Mhatre, J.
Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners, Mr. S.R. Nargolkar, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondent Nos.1 and 2
Smt. Bharti Manu Mandhora and Smt. Shubhangi Arvind Gadway
The State of Maharashtra, The Education Officer (Secondary), The Chairman/Secretary, New Education Society, The Headmaster, New English High School
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging the order of the Education Officer approving the petitioners' employment as Shikshan Sevaks instead of as assistant teachers in the appropriate pay scale.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought quashing of the order dated 13th December 2002 and a direction to approve their appointments as assistant teachers in the secondary section with appropriate pay scale counting their prior service.
Filing Reason
The Education Officer approved the petitioners' employment as Shikshan Sevaks for three years, ignoring their prior service as primary teachers since 1979, which the petitioners contended was illegal.
Previous Decisions
The petitioners were appointed as primary teachers in 1979 and their appointments were approved. In 2002, they were transferred to the secondary section and appointed as assistant teachers, but the Education Officer approved them as Shikshan Sevaks.
Issues
Whether the Education Officer could approve the appointment of the petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks ignoring their prior service as primary teachers in the same school.
Whether the impugned order granting approval as Shikshan Sevaks is valid and sustainable in law.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that they were already approved as assistant teachers and their transfer to the secondary section did not warrant a fresh appointment as Shikshan Sevaks; their prior service should be counted for pay scale.
The respondents (State and Education Officer) did not appear to contest the petition; the school management (Respondents 3 and 4) remained absent.
Ratio Decidendi
The Shikshan Sevak scheme cannot be applied to teachers who have already been approved as assistant teachers and have long service. Transfer from primary to secondary section does not justify a fresh appointment as Shikshan Sevak; prior service must be counted for pay scale fixation.
Judgment Excerpts
The Petitioners, who are Assistant Teachers, have challenged the order dated 13th December 2002 granting approval to their employment as Shikshan Sevaks.
Both the Petitioners were appointed as Primary School Teachers in 1979 in the school run by Respondent No.3.
The Petitioners who were Primary School teachers were entitled to be transferred and appointed to these vacant posts in accordance with the Rules applicable since they were the seniormost teachers.
However, on 13th December 2003, Respondent No.2 approved the employment of the Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks for a period of three years.
The impugned order is illegal and is set aside.
The Respondent No.2 is directed to approve the appointments of the Petitioners as Assistant Teachers in the Secondary Section in the appropriate pay scale counting their prior service from 1979.
Procedural History
The petitioners were appointed as primary teachers in 1979. In 2002, they were transferred to the secondary section and appointed as assistant teachers. The school sought approval, but the Education Officer approved them as Shikshan Sevaks on 13th December 2002. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No.3594 of 2003 in the Bombay High Court challenging that order. The petition was heard and allowed on 15th February 2006.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977:
