The Court emphasized the importance of the Education Officer's compliance with its directions and the illegality of rejecting proposals based on management disputes.

JUDGMENT

R. D. Dhanuka, J. - By consent of parties all these proceedings were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order.

2. Rule in Writ Petition No.5245/2020, 5933/2020, 1625/2021 and 291/2021. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

3. The respondents appearing in the matters waive notice. Rest of the respondents are absent though served.

4. In Contempt Petition No.297/2020 the petitioner Nalini Uttamsing Patil seeks action against respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 therein under the provisions of the Contempt of Courts act, 1971 alleging wilful disobedience of the order dated 04.03.2020 passed by this Court in Writ Petition 12448/2019. She seeks an order and direction against respondent nos.1, 2 and 3 to comply with the said order passed by this Court forthwith.

5. By the said order dated 04.03.2020 this Court in the said Writ Petition No.12448/2019 filed by Nalini Uttamsing Patil directed the management to forward salary bill of the petitioner therein to the Education Officer expeditiously and preferably within a period of four weeks from the date of the said order and further directed the Education Officer to process such salary bills on receipt of the same from the management immediately. The approval for transfer of the petitioner in the said Contempt Petition from unaided post to aided post was rejected by the Education Officer. The petitioner filed Writ Petition bearing No.6127/2016 alongwith other employees. By an order dated 04.07.2019 the Division Bench of this Court quashed and set aside the orders passed by the Education Officer rejecting the approvals of the petitioners therein. The said order disposed of four writ petitions filed by different employees. This Court while allowing the said petition directed as under:

'Upon confirming about the adherence to the seniority list that is those who are transferred to aided post are senior most amongst those working on unaided post and that the roster is maintained, so also their appointments are approved on unaided post, the Education Officer shall grant approvals to their appointments. If the assistant teachers who have been transferred from unaided to aided posts had not completed three years while working on unaided post, then they will be granted approvals as Shikshan Sevaks for a period they would complete three years from the date of their initial appointments and thereafter as assistant teachers. Of course, upon satisfying about the seniority and roster. However, the Education Officer shall not reject the proposal on the ground of circular dated 28.06.2016 and that there is availability of surplus teachers. The Education Officer will have to consider that services of these petitioners are approved on unaided posts.'

6. Pursuant to the said order, the management paid the current salary to the petitioner-Nalini U. Patil. It is a case of the management that, since the name of the petitioner was not included in the Shalarth Pranali, the management could not pay the salary of the petitioner for the past period. There appears to be internal dispute between two groups of the management.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that, once the Education Officer had already granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner, the management ought to have submitted the proposal of the petitioner to the Education Officer which was to be forwarded to the Deputy Director of Education for entering the name of the petitioner in the Shalarth Pranali for the purpose of making payment of the balance amount and for further salary to the petitioner. It is submitted that, the respondents have not complied with the said order dated 04.03.2020.

8. Mr. Salunke, learned counsel for the respondent nos.2 and 3 on the other hand would submit that, his clients have not willfully disobeyed the order passed by this Court by not releasing the arrears of the salary if any to the petitioner, since her name has not been included in the Shalarth Pranali. He submits that, seniority list on