1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CIVIL WRIT PETITION 5817 OF 2003 Smt. Chanda Nazma Abdul Razak ... Petitioner Vs. The Education Officer (Primary) Zilla Parishad Solapur & Ors. ... Respondents Mr.S.G.Kudle, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr.Vijay Killedar i/b. Mr. Nitin Jamdar, Advocate for Respondent No.1 Mr. S.D.Rayrikar, A.G.P for Respondent No.2 Mr. I.M. Khairdi, Advocate for Respondent No.3 CORAM: B.H.MARLAPALLE & SMT.ROSHAN S. DALVI, JJ. DATED : 13TH AUGUST, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT (PER B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.) 1. This Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India impugns the order passed by the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur on 1st September, 2001. More particularly the said order stated that the Petitioner was not entitled for the benefit of her name being kept on the waiting list under Rule 25A Sub-Rule (2) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service), Rule, 1981. 2. The said Rule reads as under:- 2 (2) The names of the employees in aided schools, whose services stand terminated in accordance with sub-rule (1) on account of de-recognition and who are not directly responsible for such de-recognition, shall be taken on a waiting list by the Education Officer in the case of Primary and Secondary Schools or by th Deputy Director in the case of High Secondary Schools and Junior College of Education, and same shall be recommended by him to the Managements of newly opened aided schools or of the existing aided schools which are allowed to open additional divisions or classes for consideration. 3. Even if the Petitioner’s challenge is accepted the only relief she would get is to maintain her name on the waiting list so as to be recommended by the Education Officer to the Management to absorb her in aided schools or of the existing aided school which are allowed to open additional divisions, or classes, for considerations. It is clear that there is no vested right of employment even though the benefit of Rule 25A, of the Rules is granted. The names maintained on such waiting list could be recommended only for consideration and not for appointment. 3 4. Be that as it may, Mr. Killedar, learned Counsel for the Zilla Parishad has placed before us the letter addressed to him by the Education Officer(Primary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur. It has been stated in the said letter that the Petitioner came to be appointed with effect from 9th June, 2004 as an Assistant Teacher in the Urdu Primary School run by Solapur Social Association and her appointment came to be approved with effect from the same day by the Education Officer in the pay scale of Rs.4500 – 7000, as per his order dated 20th June, 2007. The letter further states that the Petitioner is in employment of the said school even as of now and it has become 60% aided school in the present academic year. It is also pointed out that the Petitioner has not been given any benefit for the earlier service. In fact the scheme of Rule 25A(2) of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules does not envisage any benefit of the past service, if there is termination of service on account of abolition of post or closure of the School. Nothing has been placed before us as of now that the Petitioner does not receive her monthly salary in the pay scale of Rs. 4500 – 7000 and that despite there being vacancies available in aided primary schools (Urdu Medium), she continued in employment of the un-aided schools. 5. In these circumstances nothing further survives in this Petition and 4 the same is disposed off as such. 6. Rule discharged, but without any order as to costs. (SMT.ROSHAN S. DALVI, J.) (B.H.MARLAPALLE, J.)