S.S. Shinde, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. This Petition is filed with the following substantive prayers :

(B) By issuing appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature, the impugned order dated 09.05.2018 issued by the Respondent no.2 may kindly be quashed and set-aside.

(C) By issuing appropriate writ, order or directions in the like nature, the Respondent no.2 be directed to grant approval to the proposal dated 24.04.2018 (EXHIBIT ‘G’) forthwith.

3. It is the case of the petitioner that, he has passed H.Sc., D.Ed. and is eligible to be appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher for teaching the students of 1st standard to 7th standard. Respondent no.3 is the school, having 1st to 10th standards, wherein the petitioner was appointed, vide order dated 24th December, 2012, initially on probation for a period of two years. As per the staffing pattern of the said school, there are 19 sanctioned posts in the said school, such as, one post of Headmaster, 17 posts of Assistant Teachers and only one post of Assistant Teacher is on non grant basis. After appointment of the petitioner, respondent no.3–school submitted proposal to respondent no.2 Education Officer for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner, and accordingly, respondent no.2, vide order dated 26.03.2013, granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner. After completion of the period of probation, the permanent approval to the appointment of the petitioner as an Assistant Teacher has been granted by the Education Officer [Primary], Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad, vide order dated 9th February, 2015. Thereafter, one teacher, who was working on aided basis, stood retired from the said school. Smt. Bansode, who was having D.Ed. qualification upgraded herself by obtaining B.Ed. qualification, and therefore, she was accommodated on the post of Graduate Trained Teacher. Consequently, previous post of Assistant Teacher occupied by her became vacant.

4. It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner has made request to respondent no.3, and the management to give him appointment on the aforesaid vacant post, which is admissible on grant in aid basis. After receipt of application of the petitioner, the School Management has passed a Resolution on 31.03.2018, thereby giving appointment to the petitioner on the aforesaid vacant post admissible on grant in aid basis. Thereafter, on 31st March, 2018, the Management has issued appointment order in favour of the petitioner as Shikshan Sevak for three years, on consolidated salary of Rs.6,000/- keeping in view the Government Circular dated 28th June, 2016, issued by the School Education and Sports Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai, more particularly as per conditions referred in sub-clause 5-A and 5-B of Clause 3 of the said Circular. Thereafter, on 24th April, 2018, the School Management has forwarded the proposal of the petitioner for grant of approval to his appointment as Shikshan Sevak to respondent no.2 Education Officer. However, respondent no.2 Education Officer rejected the said proposal on the ground that there are surplus teachers available for absorption in the Aurangabad District.

5. It is further stated in the Petition that, the school Management has already accommodated in all 6 surplus teachers in its school from the Year 2008 till 2017. All these 6 surplus teachers have been sent by respondent no.2 Education Officer, and accordingly, they were accommodated by the management in its school. There are other institutions in the District with whom several posts of Assistant Teachers are lying vacant, and therefore, respondent no.2 Education Officer should have sent the surplus teacher to other institutions with whom the posts are lying vacant. Being aggrieved by the decision of t