Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 6790
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ
SMT. POOJA YOGESH SINGH AND ANR – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY AND ORS – Respondent
WP/16128/2024
Mr. Narendra V. Bandiwadekar a/w. Mr. Vinayak R. Kumbhar, Mr. Rajendra B. Khaire, Mr. Aniket Phapale i/b. Ashwini N. Bandiwadekar, for the Petitioners. Ms. S.S. Bhende, AGP for Respondent/State.
The advertisement for teacher recruitment in aided schools must comply with Rule 9(2-A) of the MEPS Rules, ensuring equal opportunity under Article 16 of the Constitution.
Headnote:(A) Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 - Rule 9(2-A) - Employment of teachers in aided schools - Petitioners challenged the rejection of approval for appointment of Shikshan Sevak due to non-compliance with advertisement requirements - Court found the advertisement published in a fortnightly newspaper did not meet legal standards, violating Article 16 of the Constitution - Impugned order upheld. (Paras 24, 30, 31)
(B) Natural Justice - The Respondent No. 3 failed to provide opportunity to rectify deficiencies in the application, violating principles of natural justice. (Paras 10, 30)
Facts of the case:
Petitioners challenged the order rejecting the appointment of Petitioner No. 1 as Shikshan Sevak, citing non-compliance with eligibility requirements and advertisement regulations.
Findings of Court:
The advertisement was deemed invalid for not being published in a widely circulated newspaper, violating Rule 9(2-A) of the MEPS Rules.
Issues: Whether the advertisement complied with MEPS Act and Rules, and if the impugned order was perverse.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the advertisement did not meet the mandatory requirements of the MEPS Rules, thus the appointment process was flawed and violated the right to equal opportunity under Article 16.
Result: Writ Petition dismissed.
JUDGMENT (PER ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally with the consent of the parties.
2. The present petition is at the instance of the Petitioner No. 1 a Shikshan Sevak and the Petitioner No.2 Management. By the present petition, Petitioners challenge the impugned order dated 25/11/2022 passed by Respondent No. 3 (at Exh. H), refusing to grant approval, to the appointment of Petitioner No. 1, as Shikshan Sevak in the aided school of Petitioner No. 2 (“impugned order”).
Petitioners seek the following substantive reliefs :
“a] Rule Nisi be issued and records and proceedings be called for.
b] By a suitable writ, order or direction, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 25.11.2022 issued by the Respondent No. 3, and accordingly the Respondent No. 3 may be directed to grant approval to the appointment of the Petitioner No. 1 as a Shikshan Sevak in the aided Secondary School of the Petitioner No. 2 Management w.e.f. 1.7.2022 for a period of 3 years, and to release the grant-in-aid for payment of monthly honorarium to the Petitioner No. 1 for the said period of 3 years.
c] By a suitable writ, order or direction, this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to grant permission to enter the name of the Petitioner No. 1 in Shalartha Pranali and to allot the Shalartha I.D. to the Petitioner No. 1 as a Shikshan Sevak in the aided secondary school of the Petitioner No. 2 Management, with all consequential benefits”
Case of the Petitioners:
3. The case of the Petitioners as set out in the Petition, interalia, is that:- Petitioner No. 1 belongs to open category; Petitioner No. 1 completed education in the stream Bachelor of Arts (English) and B.Ed. (Eng/History); Petitioner No. 2 is a linguistic (Hindi) Minority Educational Institute and is registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act 1950 and Societies Registration Act, 1860, thus Petitioner No. 2 has the status of minority educational institution within the meaning of Section 2(g) of the National Commission for Minority Educational Institution Act 2004; Petitioner No. 2 has 3 schools, out of which two are primary schools and one is secondary school; all the said three schools are receiving 100% grant in aid from the State Government; the appointment of Petitioner No. 1 is made in the secondary school by name Shanti Hindi High School at Shivaji Nagar, Valdhuni Kalyan, Thane having classes of standard 8 to 10 (said school); the service conditions of the teaching and non-teaching employees working in the said school are governed by the provisions of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Rules) Regulation Act 1977 (MEPS Act) and the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (MEPS Rules); one permanent and approved teacher working in the said school by name Smt. Sadhana Raman Hushe, was to retire on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 28/02/2022 and therefore, sanctioned post of the teacher was to fall vacant in the said school.
4. That by application dated 13/01/2022 (at Exh. B) the Head Master of the school made a request to the Respondent No. 3 to issue no objection certificate permitting the Management to initiate selection process to fill up the said vacancy; as the school did not receive any response from the Respondent No. 3 indicating either the NOC was refused or surplus teacher from another minority school was being sent for absorption in the said vacancy, the Petitioner No. 2 published advertisement in a newspaper by name “Bharatiya Nagrik” on 05/06/2022 (at Exh. C), inviting applications for the said post from qualified candidates. The applications were to be accepted till 20/06/2022; in response to the said advertisement published in the newspaper “Bharatiya Nagrik”, four applications were received. All the said four candidates were called for interview, which was held on 27/06/2022. The Selection Committee award
