GR 2013 staffing pattern held in abeyance ab initio by GR 2015; 2005 pattern continued till 2019/2020; appointments to sanctioned posts thereunder valid, approval grantable from joining date despite subsequent ban.

JUDGMENT :

AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.

1. SUBJECT MATTER:

The Petitioner - a Junior Clerk working in a private school received Education Officer’s approval to his appointment dated 16^th November 2013. But the approval is made effective only from the date of new staffing pattern dated 7^th March 2019. The exclusion of approval period is citing a ban on appointments imposed in 2015 owing to change in staffing pattern.

2. Heard Mr. Bhavake, learned counsel for the Petitioner, Ms. Kapre, learned Assistant Government Pleader. for the Respondent Nos.1 to 5- State and Mr. Desai, learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.6 & 7-School Management.

3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Considering the subject matter of the Petition, we heard the respective parties for final disposal of the Writ Petition with their consent.

4. Facts in brief:-

For the sake of convenience, sequence of some important dates and terminology used herein is necessary to be described.

4.1 The facts in the case are almost uncontroverted. The only issue that arises for consideration is the interpretation of some Government Resolutions, applicability of staffing patterns and the ban imposed by the Government Resolution dated 12^th February 2015.

4.2 The Petitioner holds the qualification of B.Com, M.B.A. As such he is it to be appointed as Junior Clerk. In the year 2013, a sanctioned post of Junior Clerk in the Respondent No.7-School run by the Respondent No.6-Management had fallen vacant on account of promotion of one Mr. R.D. Taralekar (hereinafter referred as the (subject-matter post”).

Here, it is pertinent to note that the post on which Mr. R.D. Taralekwar was working, happened to be a sanctioned post as per the staffing pattern of 2005 which was operational.

4.3 Accordingly, the School Management conducted a selection procedure and the Petitioner came to be appointed on the subject matter post by the Respondent No.6-Management vide Order dated 16^th November 2013.

4.4 These facts are not in dispute. In due course, the school Management submitted a proposal to the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur seeking approval to Petitioner’s appointment on the subject-matter post of Junior Clerk.

4.5 On 9^th August 2021, the Education Officer granted approval to the Petitioner’s appointment. However, the approval is made effective with effect from 7^th March 2019. As such, the stipulation in order dated 9^th August 2021 which excluded approval period ‘with effect of from the date of appointment till 7^th March 2019’ is the cause of action for the Petitioner to ile the present Writ Petition.

5. Petitioner’s arguments :

5.1 Mr. Bhavake, learned Counsel for the Petitioner would make following submissions in brief :

(i) There is no illegality in the Petitioner’s appointment.

(ii) There is no dispute as regards to the status of the subject matter post i.e. whether it was sanctioned in the staffing pattern or not. It was admittedly sanctioned already as per staffing pattern introduced by Government Resolution dated 25^th November 2005. (hereinafter referred as “staffing pattern of 2005” for the sake of convenience).

(iii) The Education Officer is in agreement that the Petitioner’s appointment is as per the law and the procedure. Objection is not raised by the Education Officer to the appointment dated 16^th November 2013, but the reference is given to ban imposed by the Government Resolution of 2015 which is subsequent to Petitioner’s appointment.

(iv) Refusal to the approval during the period of 18^th November2013 (date of his joining) till 7^th March 2019 (new staffing pattern) cannot be sustained for the reason that at the time of Petitioner’s appointment, there was no ban on the appointment.

(v) To conclu