Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Ganesh s/o Raghu Jadhav, possessed B.Sc.B.Ed. qualification and was appointed as Assistant Teacher by respondent No.3, Janata Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, which runs four aided schools, by order dated 31st July 2014. On 2nd September 2014, respondent No.2, the Education Officer (Secondary), granted approval to the appointment on no grant basis. In Mangaleshwar Vidyalaya run by respondent No.3, there was a workload of Mathematics subject and no teacher was available. On 20.6.2014, respondent No.3 proposed to transfer the petitioner to the said school, but the petitioner sought guidance from respondent No.2, who advised that if the teacher is granted approval, the transfer can be effected as a 'Shikshan Sevak'. On 1.9.2014, the petitioner was transferred to Mangaleshwar Vidyalaya as Shikshan Sevak. Respondent No.3 submitted a proposal for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner. The query raised as regards vacancy also came to be satisfied by respondent No.3. However, the approval came to be rejected. The Court, after hearing the parties, allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order of rejection, directing respondent No.2 to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his appointment, with all consequential benefits.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Appointment of Shikshan Sevak - Approval - Vacancy - The Education Officer rejected approval on the ground that the appointment was made on a post which was not vacant. The Court held that the Management had clarified the vacancy position and the petitioner was appointed as Shikshan Sevak, which is a distinct category. The rejection was not sustainable. (Paras 1-4)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Education Officer (Secondary) was justified in rejecting the proposal for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Shikshan Sevak on the ground that the appointment was made on a post which was not vacant.
Final Decision
The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order rejecting approval is set aside. Respondent No.2 is directed to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his appointment, with all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Appointment of Shikshan Sevak
- Approval of appointment
- Vacancy position
- Education Officer's power to reject approval
