:1: :1: :1: srp. HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7113 OF 2006. WRIT PETITION NO. 7113 OF 2006. WRIT PETITION NO. 7113 OF 2006. Yeshwant Shankar Babar, Age: 54 years, Occ: Headmaster & Secretary School Committee, Balasaheb Desai Vidyalaya, Chopdi, Tal: Sangola, Dist: Solapur. ..Petitioner. V E R S U S 1. The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Solapur 2. State of Maharashtra, Through: Secretary, School Education & Sports Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032. 3. Balasaheb Bhimrao Babar, Age: 35 years, Occu:Asst. Teacher in Balasaheb Desai Vidyalaya, Chopdi, Tal: Sangola, Dist: Solapur. 4. Vikas Education Society, Chopadi, Tal: Sangola, Dist: Solapur, Through : President Dr. Anand Gopal Babar. ..Respondents. --- Mr. S. G. Kudle for the petitioner. Mr. M. L. Patil for the respondent No.3. Mr.C.R.Sonawane A.G.P. for the respondent nos. 1 & 2. Mr. Vishwanath Talkute for respondent no.4. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. CORAM: S.B.MHASE & A.A.KUMBHAKONI, JJ. DATE : May 5, 2008. DATE : May 5, 2008. DATE : May 5, 2008. Oral Judgment (Per S.B.Mhase,J.) Oral Judgment (Per S.B.Mhase,J.) Oral Judgment (Per S.B.Mhase,J.) . Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith with the consent of parties. :2: :2: :2: 2. Heard. The petitioner has challenged the order passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur on 18th September 2006, thereby directing the Management - Respondent no.4 to submit the pay-bills of the respondent no.3 in the B.Ed. pay scale. 3. Respondent no.3 was appointed on 2nd September 1997 as Assistant Teacher in D.Ed. scale. The Headmaster of the said school retired on 28th February 2005. As a result of the retirement of Headmaster there would have been a vacancy in the cadre of B.A., B.Ed. wherein the respondent no.3 could have been absorbed. Therefore the retiring Headmaster being the Secretary of the School Committee appointed the respondent no.3 with effect from 1.3.2005 in the B.Ed. scale and thereafter retired. It appears that the said appointment was also approved by the Education Officer by its letter dated 4.6.2005 with effect from 1.3.2005. However, subsequently it was brought to the notice of the Education Officer that there was no resolution of the School Committee and the retiring Headmaster in his capacity as Secretary of the School Committee had issued the said letter appointing respondent no.3. It is brought to the notice of the Education Officer that even though the Headmaster is Secretary of the School Committee, he has to act as per the decision taken by the School Committee and as there was no decision taken by :3: :3: :3: the School Committee for appointing the respondent no.3, the appointment of the respondent no.3 was inappropriate. The Education Officer has considered the said fact and has, by its letter dated 5th October 2005, withdrawn the approval which was already granted to the appointment of the respondent no.3. 4. On such withdrawal the respondent no.3 filed a writ petition, being Writ Petition No. 9270 of 2005, wherein it appears that without hearing the Management the directions were given by this Court that the Education Officer may implement its orders regarding the release of salary of the respondent no.3 and the claim of the respondent no.3 was directed to be decided expeditiously. On the basis of these directions, an enquiry was conducted and order dated 18th February 2005 was passed wherein the directions were given to the Management to submit the pay bills of the respondent no.3 in the B.Ed. pay scale, which is impugned in this petition. 5. On reading the order and on hearing the parties the fact is crystal clear that the retiring Headmaster in his capacity as Secretary of the School Committee without taking the School Committee in confidence has issued the order in favour of the respondent no.3. Under these circumstances as there is no resolution of the School Committee, there cannot be :4: :4: :4: any liability on the School Committee, namely, the Appointing Authority, to pay to the respondent no.3 in the B.Ed. scale. Therefore the directions given by the Education Officer to submit the pay bills of the respondent no.3 in B.A., B.Ed. scale is not just and proper. Under these circumstances, we hereby struck down the impugned order passed by the Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Solapur dated 18th September 2006 directing the 4th Respondent to submit the pay-bills of 3rd Respondent in B.Ed. pay scale. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Petition is accordingly disposed of. (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) (A.A.KUMBHAKONI, J.) (S.B.MHASE, J.) :2008/aak/..