1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.5119 OF 2009 * Sheshrao S/o Waman Shinde,] Age 32 years, ] Occupation : Service, ] R/o Jevari, Taluka Nilanga] District Latur. ] ... Petitioner Versus 1) The State of Maharashtra, ] Through the Secretary, ] Social Welfare Department,] Mantralaya, Mumbai, ] ] 2) The Divisional Social ] Welfare Officer, ] Latur Division, Latur. ] ] 3) The District Social ] Welfare Officer "A", ] Zilla Parishad, Latur. ] ] 4) Lokshahir Annabhau Sathe ] Education Society, ] Nilanga, Taluka Nilanga, ] District Latur, ] Through its President/ ] Secretary. ] ] 5) The Head Master, ] Kai. Sarswati Shinde ] Nivasi Apang Vidyalaya ] Nilanga, Taluka Nilanga, ] District Latur. ] 2 6) Madhav Maruti Londhe, ] Age 39 years, ] Occupation : Service, ] R/o Bhutmugli, ] Taluka Nilanga, ] District Latur. ] ... Respondents. -------- Shri. Shrikishan S. Shinde, Advocate for petitioner. Shri. D.R. Kale,Assistant Government Pleader for respondent Nos.1 and 2. Shri. S.S. Manale, Advocate for respondent No. 3. Shri. V.G. Mohekar, Advocate, for respondent Nos.4 and 5. Shri. R.K. Ashtekar, Advocate for respondent No.6. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & A.V. POTDAR, JJ. DATE: 27th APRIL 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER NARESH H PATIL, J.): 1) Heard. 2) Rule, returnable forthwith. 3) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is 3 otherwise terminated. The petitioner was appointed in the year 2004. Thereafter approval was granted to the services on 24-8-2006. The petitioner's salary is not paid since the year 2007. 4) The learned counsel appearing for respondent No.6 - Madhav submits that, he was appointed in the year 1998. He is B.A. B.P.Ed. while the petitioner is SSC, C.T.C. The respondent No.6 - Madhav filed an appeal being Appeal No.1 of 2007 before the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Latur Region Latur. Admittedly the present petitioner - Sheshrao Waman Shinde was not party to the proceedings. The Divisional Social Welfare Officer while considering the case of Madhav observed that Sheshrao Shinde, the petitioner herein, was qualified as SSC CTC and, therefore it was concluded 4 by the authority that the petitioner was not eligible for appointment as Art Teacher. It is further observed that the respondent No.6 - Madhav Londhe was BA B.P.Ed when he was appointed. Therefore, he was entitled to be appointed as Art Teacher. 5) Considering the facts of the case and the fact that the petitioner was not a party to the proceedings of the appeal, the adverse observations and findings caused prejudice to the petitioner. In fairness, the petitioner ought to have been heard by the authority concerned which failed to do so in spite of the fact that the management had brought to the notice of the authority by filing Written Statement the service record of the petitioner, according to the counsel for the management. 5 6) On the ground stated above we find that, the impugned order is required to be quashed and set aside as being unreasonable and prejudicial to the petitioner. 7) The order dated 14-8-2008 passed by the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Latur Region, Latur in Appeal No.1 of 2007 is quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded back to the said authority. The parties shall appear before the authority on 17th May 2010 at 11.00 a.m. The parties shall cooperate in final disposal of the appeal. The petitioner be added as one of the respondents to the appeal. The parties are entitled to file their written statements/ replies / say. The management shall also produce necessary record before the authority concerned. We direct that the appeal shall be finally decided within three 6 months from the date of appearance of the parties before the authority. The issue of payment of salary would be agitated by the concerned parties after disposal of the appeal. We observe that if the respondent No.6 Madhav is still in service, the parties shall maintain status-quo in respect of service of respondent No.6 Madhav till final disposal of the appeal. 8) We express no opinion on the merits of the matter. All issues are kept open. 9) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Sd/- Sd/- (A.V. POTDAR, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl/ wp.5119.09