The Education Officer has no jurisdiction to determine seniority after promotion, and the initial appointment date should be considered for seniority.

R.D. Dhanuka, J.

Rule. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent waives service. By consent of parties, the petition is heard finally.

2. By this writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has impugned the order passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Satara holding that the respondent No. 4 is senior in service to the petitioner in the cadre of Assistant Teacher in the secondary school run by the respondent No. 3 Society and directing the respondent No. 3 to submit proposal of the respondent No. 4 as Head Master to the Education Officer. The impugned order has been passed by the Education Officer in exercise of power under Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (for short "the said MEPS Rules”). Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :-

3. The petitioner was born on 14th September, 1960 and has passed M.A.B.Ed. and is duly qualified to be appointed as an Assistant Teacher in the secondary school. The respondent No. 3 is the Education Institution registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 and also the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The respondent No. 3 is running a Government recognised secondary school by name New English School at Mandhardeo, Taluka-Wai, District-Satara having classes Standard V to X. The said school was started in the academic year 1988-89 on an unaided basis and it started receiving grant-in-aid from the Government stage wise. The said school became fully aided in the year 1995-96. The respondent No. 2 is the Education Officer who has been appointed under the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (for short “the said MEPS Act”).

4. It is the case of the petitioner that in the academic year 1990-91 when the school was being run on no grant basis, the management initiated selection procedure and after completing the same, he was selected as an Assistant Teacher in the said school. The management passed a resolution in its meeting dated 11th June, 1990 and decided to appoint the petitioner along with four other employees in the said school. The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Teacher on 13th June, 1990 vide an appointment order dated 13th June, 1990. It is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner accordingly joined the school from 13th June, 1990. Since the school was not receiving any grant-in-aid, the management as well as the Head Master of the school did not submit any proposal to the Education Officer for approval to the said appointment of the petitioner as well as the other four employees mentioned in the said resolution dated 11th June, 1990.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that from the date of joining the said school, the petitioner continuously worked in the said school without any break. During the month of May vacation, the school was closed. The petitioner however was paid salary for the said vacation by the management.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that for the academic year 1991-92, the respondent No. 3 passed a resolution dated 1st June, 1991 and appointed the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher from 19th June, 1991 on probation. The management accordingly issued an appointment letter on 4th June, 1991 in favour of the petitioner on probation for a period of two years. It is the case of the petitioner that services of the petitioner came to be continued in the subsequent academic year also.

7. By an order dated 30th March, 1993, the Education Officer granted approval to the appointments of various teaching and non teaching employees in the said school including the petitioner. The petitioner came to be granted approval from 19th June, 1991 on probation. By an order dated 12th March, 1994, the Education Officer granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner for the academic year 1993-94 in the same pay scale.