Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Taslim Maulana Rampure and Sanober Rafique Ahmed Mujawar, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging a communication dated 7 July 2015 by which the Education Officer (Primary) Zilla Parishad, Solapur (Respondent No.1) rejected the proposal for grant of approval of appointment of Petitioner No.1 as Shikshan Sevak. The petition, insofar as Petitioner No.2 was concerned, was withdrawn. The petitioner was appointed as Shikshan Sevak on 2 May 2011 by Respondent No.4, Sarvoday Krida Va Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, which is a religious minority institution. It was not in dispute that the petitioner possessed the necessary qualifications. The management had sent a proposal to Respondent No.1 for grant of approval, but as it was not decided, the petitioner approached the High Court by way of Writ Petition No. 1984 of 2015. A Division Bench of this Court vide order dated 8 May 2015 allowed the petition and directed the Education Officer to consider the proposal. By the impugned order, Respondent No.1 rejected the proposal on the ground that the management had failed to absorb the surplus teacher. The Court noted that it was not in dispute that Respondent No.4 is a religious minority. The Court held that the issue is no more res integra, relying on the decision of the Aurangabad Bench in Writ Petition No. 3707 of 2013 (Parbhani Education Society Vs. Education Officer) and other judgments, which held that a religious minority institution is not required to absorb surplus teachers. Consequently, the Court quashed and set aside the impugned order and directed Respondent No.1 to grant approval to the appointment of Petitioner No.1 as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his initial appointment with all consequential benefits. The rule was made absolute accordingly.
Headnote
A) Education Law - Minority Institution - Appointment of Shikshan Sevak - Religious minority institution not required to absorb surplus teachers - The Education Officer rejected the proposal for approval of appointment of Petitioner No.1 as Shikshan Sevak on the ground that the management had failed to absorb the surplus teacher. The Court held that the issue is no more res integra and that a religious minority institution is not required to absorb surplus teachers. The impugned order was quashed and set aside, and the Education Officer was directed to grant approval to the appointment of Petitioner No.1 as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his initial appointment with all consequential benefits. (Paras 5-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Education Officer can reject the proposal for grant of approval of appointment of a Shikshan Sevak in a religious minority institution on the ground that the management had failed to absorb the surplus teacher.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 7 July 2015 is quashed and set aside. Respondent No.1 is directed to grant approval to the appointment of Petitioner No.1 as Shikshan Sevak from the date of his initial appointment with all consequential benefits. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
Law Points
- Religious minority institutions are exempt from the requirement to absorb surplus teachers
- Appointment of Shikshan Sevak in minority institution does not require prior approval of Education Officer
- Right of minority institutions under Article 30 of Constitution of India
