1 WP4281-4557.11 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4281 OF 2011 Shri Krishna Shripati Lonkar ... Petitioner v/s The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4557 OF 2011 Vangaon Education Society & ors. ... Petitioners v/s The State of Maharashtra & ors. ... Respondents Mr.N.V.Bandiwadekar for the petitioners in both petitions. Ms.S.S.Bhende, A.G.P. for Resp. Nos.1 & 2 in both petitions. CORAM: A. M. KHANWILKAR & R. Y. GANOO, JJ. DATED: 15TH JULY, 2011 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith by consent of the learned A.G.P. who has waived service for the State. The 2 WP4281-4557.11 presence of respondent No.3 in the first petition is not necessary for the nature of reliefs claimed. Accordingly, by consent we have taken up these petitions for final disposal forthwith. 3. The issue raised in these petitions is similar to one which has already been decided by the Division Bench of this Court in Balmohan Vidyamandir Vishwast Mandal, Mumbai & anr. v/s The State of Maharashtra & anr., in Writ Petition (L) No.2286 of 2010, dated 14.10.2010. The Division Bench has held that if it is a case of two schools run by the management and the if the post of Head Master of such school were to be reserved, it would result in reservation upto 50% which would be far in excess of the percentage provided in M.E.P.S Rules i.e. 33%. On the same reasoning these petitions ought to succeed. The above decision has been followed in another case involving similar question, by the Bench presided over by one of us (A.M.Khanwilkar, J.), in writ Petition No.1859 of 2011 decided on 19.4.2011. For the same reasons, both these petitions would succeed. 4. The Rule is made absolute in both these petitions by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the appropriate authority and instead directing the said 3 WP4281-4557.11 authority to consider the claim of the respective petitioners for granting approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Head Master. That question will have to be considered on its own merits on other matters relevant to examine the said proposal. The appropriate authority shall decide the proposal qua the respective petitioners as expeditiously as possible, in any case not later than 31.8.2011. 5. The petitions are disposed of accordingly. ( R. Y. GANOO, J. ) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) 4 WP4281-4557.11