In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
MR. JUSTICE B.R. GAVAI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.V. GANGAPURWALA
Santosh Ekoba Sonavane & Others
Versus
State of Maharashtra & Others
WRIT PETITION NO.3424 OF 1997
Decided on: 02-07-2010
Promotion - Extension Officer - Section 248, Section 274 of Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court
Fact of the Case:
Petitioners challenged the dismissal of their appeals against the promotion of Respondents No.5 to 14 to the post of Extension Officer. They argued that despite being senior, their claim for promotion was not considered.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the existing rules created an anomalous situation where junior persons could be promoted over seniors, violating fundamental rights. The court directed the State Government to make necessary amendments to the rules within six months.
Issues: The issues revolved around the promotion of the petitioners to the post of Extension Officer and the anomalous situation created by the existing rules.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the existing rules violated fundamental rights by depriving qualified candidates of promotion and allowing junior persons to be promoted over seniors.
Final Decision: The court directed the State Government to make necessary amendments to the rules within six months and disposed of the writ petition.
B.R.GAVAI, J.
1. Petitioners, by way of present petition, challenge the judgment and order dated 06.01.1997, passed by learned Additional Commissioner, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad, thereby dismissing appeals filed by present petitioners; and the orders of promotion issued in favour of Respondent No.5 to 14 to the post of Extension Officer (Education) in District Technical Services Class III Grade II.
2. Petitioners were initially appointed as Assistant teachers under the administration of Zilla Parishad. All the petitioners are possessing graduation degree along with degree in education. As such, petitioners are in the category of trained graduate teachers. On the basis of their seniority in the said cadre, petitioners were promoted as `Kendra Pramukh’ in the Central Schools. Subsequent to the promotion of petitioners to the post of Kendra Pramukhs, Respondents No.5 to 14 came to be promoted as Extension Officers (Education) in District Technical Services Class III Grade II. Aggrieved by the said promotion, petitioners preferred appeals before the Divisional Commissioner. Same are rejected. Hence present petition.
3. Shri Deshpande, learned Counsel for petitioners, submits that though petitioners are senior in the cadre of Assistant teachers to Respondents No.5 to 14, said respondents have been put in higher cadre and they would also be writing confidential reports of the petitioners. He, therefore, submits that it was incumbent upon Respondent Zilla Parishad to have considered the claim of the petitioners for promotion to the post of Extension Officer. According to the learned Counsel, having not done so, promotion granted in favour of respondents no.5 to 14 is liable to be set aside.
4. Shri Talekar, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the employees who have been promoted, on the contrary, submitted that vide Government Resolution dated 14.11.1994, a separate cadre of Kendra Pramukhs has been created and that petitioners, having opted for said cadre, are now estopped from claiming promotion to the post of Extension Officer, which is exclusively available to the Assistant teachers. It is submitted by Shri Talekar that petitioners cannot blow hot and cold at the same time. It is submitted that if petitioners were interested in the post of Extension Officer (Education), they could have denied promotion to the post of Kendra Pramukh. He submitted that having accepted the post of Kendra Pramukh, petitioners are now estopped from making grievance regarding their non consideration for promotion to the post of Extension Officer (Education).
5. Shri Bankar Patil, learned Counsel appearing for Zilla Parishad, submits that in view of the clarification dated 31.01.1996, issued by the State Government, which clarified that persons holding the post of Kendra Pramukh were not eligible to be promoted as Extension Officers, the Zilla Parishad had rightly promoted Respondents No.5 to 14.
6. Learned Assistant Government Pleader also submits that in view of the Government Resolution of 1994, contention of petitioners is without basis.
7. To appreciate rival submissions, it will be necessary to refer to some statutory provisions.
Section 248 of Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the said Act’) enables the State Government to make Rules regulating recruitment, etc. Said Section reads thus:
248 Recruitment and conditions of service of persons serving the Zilla Parishad – Subject to the provisions of this Chapter, the State Government may make rules regulating (a) the recruitment (including reservation for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes and Backward Classes), functions and terms and conditions of service (including payment of dearness allowance and all conduct and disciplinary matters) of persons appointed to the District Technical Service (Class III), District Service (Class III) and District Service (Class IV), and
(b) the payment to be made by the Zilla Parishad towards pens
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.