Bombay High Court Allows Absorption of Teachers in Other Schools but Denies Salary for Prior Period. Teachers of a non-grant school sought salary from September 2019 but were absorbed during pendency; court held salary payable only from date of absorption.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: AURANGABAD
  • 2
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, four teachers employed by Trimurti Magaswargiya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal (Respondent No.5), a non-grant school, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking directions to the State authorities (Respondents 1-4) to absorb them in other recognized grant-in-aid schools and to release their salary from September 2019 until such absorption. During the pendency of the petition, the petitioners were absorbed in other schools and were being paid salary from the date of absorption. The court, after hearing the parties, held that the petitioners are not entitled to salary for the period prior to their absorption as they were not working during that time. The petition was disposed of with a direction that the petitioners' salary be paid from the date of their absorption in the new schools.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Absorption of Teachers - Salary from Date of Absorption - The petitioners, teachers of a non-grant school, sought absorption in other schools and salary from September 2019. The court held that they are entitled to salary only from the date of their actual absorption, not from an earlier date, as they were not working during the intervening period. (Paras 1-4)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to salary from September 2019 till their absorption in other recognized schools?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is disposed of. The petitioners are not entitled to salary from September 2019. They are entitled to salary from the date of their absorption in the new schools.

Law Points

  • Absorption of surplus teachers
  • Salary from date of absorption
  • No right to salary for period prior to absorption
  • Article 226 of Constitution of India
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (BOM) (07) 158

Writ Petition No.1153 of 2021

2026-07-03

Nitin B. Suryawanshi, Abasaheb D. Shinde

Mr. P. G. Tambade h/f. Mr. Santosh S. Jadhavar for Petitioners, Mr. V. M. Kagne, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3, Mr. S. D. Kaldate for Respondent No.4, Mr. Sanjaykumar B. Bhosale for Respondent No.5

Balasaheb Manik Bhore, Manesh Atmaram Navale, Rajendra Ramrao Pawar, Mahendra Pandurang Jatgap

The State of Maharashtra, The Director of Education (Primary), The Deputy Director of Education, The Education Officer (Primary), Trimurti Magaswargiya Shikshan Prasarak Mandal

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition seeking absorption and salary from non-grant school teachers

Remedy Sought

Direction to absorb petitioners in other recognized schools and release salary from September 2019

Filing Reason

Petitioners were teachers in a non-grant school and sought absorption in grant-in-aid schools with salary from September 2019

Issues

Whether petitioners entitled to salary from September 2019 till absorption?

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioners argued for salary from September 2019; respondents opposed.

Ratio Decidendi

Teachers absorbed during pendency of petition are entitled to salary only from date of absorption, not from an earlier date when they were not working.

Judgment Excerpts

During pendency of this Petition, the petitioners are absorbed in other schools and they are being paid salary in the said schools with effect from the date of absorption.

Procedural History

Writ Petition filed in 2021; during pendency, petitioners were absorbed in other schools; final hearing on 08.06.2026; judgment pronounced on 03.07.2026.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Revision Application of Accused in Cheque Dishonour Case Due to Non-Compliance of 15-Day Notice Requirement Under Section 138(b) of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. Failure to Send Demand Notice Within 15 Days from Bank Info...
Related Judgement
High Court High Court of Karnataka Enhances Compensation for Death in Motor Accident - Negligence of KSRTC Bus Driver Established. The Court held that the deceased's income should include future prospects and applied a multiplier of 17 under the Motor Vehicles ...