(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 3526 OF 1997 Ramesh s/o. Daulat Ahire, Age : 46 years, Occupation : Service, Lecturer in Junior College, New English School (Junior College), Shirasgaon, Taluka : Chalisgaon, District : Jalgaon. .. Petitioner. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Bombay. 2. The Director of Education, Maharashtra State, Pune. 3. The Dy. Director of Education, Nashik Division, Nashik. 4. Rashtriya Sahakari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Ltd., Chalisgaon, District : Jalgaon, through its Chairman. (2) 5. The Secretary, Rashtriya Sahakari Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Ltd., Chalisgaon, District : Jalgaon. 6. The Head Master, New English School (Junior College), Shirasgaon, Taluka : Chalisgaon, District : Jalgaon. .. Respondents. 7. Shri R.B. Kulkarni, .. Petition dismissed Age : Major, as against respondent Occupation : Service, no.7. R/o. Gurudatta Colony, Malegaon Road, Chalisgaon, District : Jalgaon. ....................... Mr. S.R. Barlinge, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. K.B. Chaudhary, Additional Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3. Mr. P.R. Patil, Advocate, for respondent nos.4 and 6. Respondent no.5 served (Absent). Petition dismissed as against respondent no.7, vide order dated 14-7-2003. ........................ (3) CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 7TH JULY 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V. Gangapurwala, J.) : 1. Vide the present Writ Petition, the petitioner assails the order dated 17th March 1997, passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Division, Nashik, refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner, as a Lecturer in Junior College, in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500, and consequently, also seeks directions to set aside the order dated 18th August 1997, passed by the respondent nos.4 and 5, transferring the petitioner from Junior College to Secondary School. 2. It has been brought to our notice, that the petitioner has retired from service in the year 2009. As such, the relief in terms of prayer clause "C" has become superfluous and the petition is restricted only to the extent of challenge to the order dated 17th March 1997. 3. The petitioner herein was appointed, as an Assistant Teacher in the school run by the respondent no.4, on 18-8-1980. The petitioner was also confirmed in the seniority list of (4) Assistant Teachers, in Category "C", as per Schedule "F" of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. It is the case of the petitioner, that he was also allotted with lectures in History in Junior College and was paid additional allowance of Rs. 125/- and the arrangement continued up to the year 1995-96. On or about 1-7-1996, his appointment was approved by the Deputy Director of Education. Thereafter, on 18-2-1997, the respondent no.4 appointed the petitioner as full time Lecturer in History, in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500. The respondent no.4, vide its resolution dated 30th March 1997, also confirmed the said appointment. 4. The respondent nos.4 and 5 submitted proposal for approval of petitioner's appointment, as a full time Lecturer in Junior College, but the respondent no.3 by order dated 17-3-1997, refused to grant approval to the said appointment, on the ground that as the petitioner is H.D.Ed., he is disqualified for teaching general subjects. This order is impugned by the petitioner. 5. Mr. S.R. Barlinge, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has contended that the Government vide its resolution dated 24th July 1969, has resolved that the holders of the Higher Diploma in Education (with specialization in Physical (5) Education) are eligible to be trained graduates. As such, the said qualification is put on par with the B.Ed. qualification. It is also submitted that the petitioner has got Master's Degree in Arts, in second class and he is teaching History subject. According to Mr. Barlinge, learned Counsel, as the petitioner confirms with qualification required, the Deputy Director of Education erred in passing the impugned order and refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Junior College. 6. Mr. K.B. Chaudhary, Additional Government Pleader appearing for respondent nos.1, 2 and 3, has contended that the petitioner is not qualified and has placed reliance on the Government Resolution dated 14th October 1992. He has further contended that unless the workload is available, the petitioner cannot be granted approval. 7. The facts of the present case, regarding the petitioner possessing necessary qualification, are not disputed. The said Government Resolution dated 24th July 1969 has not been superseded by any other resolution and the same still holds the field. On perusal of the said resolution, it is manifest that a person holding Higher Diploma in Education is to be treated on par with B.Ed. course. (6) 8. The reliance placed by Mr. K.B. Chaudhary, learned Additional Government Pleader, appearing for respondent nos.1 to 3, on the Government Resolution dated 14th October 1992, is totally misplaced, as the said resolution only concerns with the persons teaching subject of Physical Education. In the present case, it is admitted, that the petitioner was teaching the Arts subject i.e. History. 9. In view of the above, we have no hesitation to hold that the petitioner possesses the necessary qualification i.e. he has passed Master's Degree in Arts, in second division, and also holds Higher Diploma in Education. As such, the Deputy Director of Education erred in not granting approval to the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Junior College. As such, the impugned order deserves to be quashed and set aside. 10. Mr. S.R. Barlinge, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner has retired from service in the year 2009 and pursuant to the impugned order, he was working in the Secondary School. 11. As the petitioner has retired from service, we are not inclined to grant the arrears that the petitioner would be entitled to, on account of fixation of his pay scale as that of a Lecturer in (7) Junior College. However, the petitioner would be entitled, prospectively, to all benefits of the pay scale of Lecturer in Junior College. 12. In the result, the petition is allowed. (i) The impugned order dated 17th March 1997, passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Nashik Division, Nashik, refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Junior College, in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500, is quashed and set aside. (ii) The respondent no.3 is directed to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as a Lecturer in Junior College in the pay scale of Rs. 2000-3500. (iii) It is made clear, that the petitioner shall not be entitled to back wages on account of approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer in Junior College. However, he shall be entitled to continuity in service and pensionary benefits flowing therefrom. (iv) The respondents are directed to work out fixation of pension payable to the petitioner, in the light of the observations above, within a period of three months from today, and make (8) the pension payment to the petitioner accordingly. 13. Rule is made absolute on the above terms. However, there shall be no order as to costs. ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/wp3526