The authority of respondent no.3 to investigate irregularities and grant permission for criminal complaints, and the petitioners' right to claim discharge in the criminal proceeding.

JUDGMENT

S.G. Mehare, J. - Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By the consent of parties heard finally.

2. By these petitions under article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the same order dated 19.06. 2017 passed by respondent no.3, by which he held that in the said matter prima facie irregularity is committed and permitted the complainant/ respondent no. 6 to lodge criminal complaints against the concerned. They have also assailed a communication dated 27.08.2019, by which respondent no.2 again directed his subordinate to inquire against the petitioners about the same allegations.

3. To appreciate the lis, it will be appropriate to refer to the relevant facts in brief. Initially, the petitioners were appointed as special teachers in the mobile units under Integrated Education for the Disabled Children Scheme ('IEDCS' for short), run by Jai Bhavani Rashtriya Prasarak Mandal, Dhule. They were given a sanction from 15.01.2009. Then IEDC scheme was closed, and Inclusive Education of the Disabled at Secondary Stage ('IEDSS' for short), sponsored by the Central Government, was introduced. The teachers who were working under the IEDC scheme, possessing the qualification to teach in secondary school, were absorbed with the schools. The petitioner Hemraj Patil (W.P. No.8940/2017) was working in N.G. Bagul High School and Junior College at Songir, the petitioner Ulhas Prakash Suryawanshi (W.P. No. 8941/2017) was working in Hajibadlu Sardar Urdu High School Islampura, Devpur, the petitioner Ranjit Zumbarlal Patil ( W.P. No.8942/2017) was working in Swami Teuram High School Sakri road, and the petitioner Pratibha Dinkar Sonawane (W.P. No. 8943/2017) was working in Zilla Parishad Vidyalaya, ardhe (Bk) Shirpur, in Dhule District.

4. On 31.08.2009, respondent no. 1/ State Government issued a Government Resolution holding that the scheme approved by the Central Government under IEDSS is set up in the State of Maharashtra from 2009-2010. Therefore, teachers with the requisite qualification to teach higher secondary school are automatically transferred to such schools. Till april 2012, the respective schools have extended all support to the petitioners.

However, the accounts/Salary Department issued a letter informing that the salary to the Special Teachers appointed on Mobile Units run by the schools shall be disbursed only after proforma are sent by the Principals. The Principals did not send such proforma. Hence, the petitioners had filed the writ petitions. This Court directed the Director of Education (Primary) to pass fresh orders about their absorption.

5. The State Government/respondent no.1 acted upon the directions of this Court and, by Government Resolution dated 19.10.2015, informed respondent nos. 2 to 4 that the salary arrears till the end of February 2015 were disbursed and deposited in the account of respondent no.2. The Head Master of the school sent a letter along with the salary bills to the concerned by following the procedure. The said Court orders were not obeyed. Therefore, Contempt Petitions were filed. This Court had disposed off those Contempt Petitions by order dated 2nd august 2017, directing the State Government to take appropriate decision in the matter in consonance with the directions issued by this Court on 12.08.2015 in W.P. No.2924/2014 and companion matters, within four months from the date of order. So far as the arrears of salary are concerned, it is observed that it would be the responsibility of the respondents to pay the amount of arrears, as directed by this Court. With the above direction and observation, the Contempt Petitions were disposed off.

6. Respondent no.6 complained to respondent no.3. He held the inquiry calling upon all the petitioners and came to the conclusion that an irregularity is committed in the matter. He directed respondent no.4 not to release the salary of the petitioners, henceforth. He held that Z.P. School teachers, Head Masters, Block Education Offic