1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7377 OF 2007 1. Janardan S/o Marotrao Jadhav, Age : 30 Years, 2. Niranjan S/o Narayanrao Nayak, Age : 30 Years, 3. Yadav Kondiarao Davale, Age : 27 Years, All are having occupation : Nil, R/o Lohara Limbi, Taluka and District Hingoli. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra 2. The Commissioner of Tribal Development, Nasik, 3. The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati. 4. The Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Kinwat, Dist. Nanded. 5. Adivasi Magasvargiya Vikas Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, Kalamnoorie, Through its President Shri Amrutrao S/o Shankarrao Bothikar, Age : 45 Years, Occu. : Agril. R/o Bothi, Tq. Kalamnoorie, District Hingoli. 2 6. The Director, Maharashtra Education Research and Training Institute, Sadashiv Peth, Pune. .. .. Respondents Shri S. B. Talekar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Shri R. P. Phatke, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 and 6. CORAM : B. R. GAVAI, AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATE : 09TH SEPTEMBER, 2009. ORAL JUDGMENT [Per B. R. Gavail, J. ] : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard by consent. 2. By way of present petition, the petitioners are seeking direction to the respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to allow the petitioner's in their respective posts in any Ashram School either newly established or existing one. 3. The petitioners No. 1 and 2 were appointed as untrained primary teachers vide order dated 19th June, 2000 and the petitioner No. 3 was appointed as Hostel Superintendent vide order dated 14th June, 1999 by the respondent No. 5. The respondent No. 4 vide various orders had granted approval to the services of the petitioners. However, it appears that, vide order dated 11th March, 3 2005 the recognition granted to the school run by respondent No. 5 was withdrawn. Vide the said order dated 11th March, 2005, the employees working in the said school were directed to be absorbed in some other Government or aided Ashram School. Thereafter, the petitioners made various representations to absorb them, however, vide communication dated 12th September, 2007, the representation of the petitioners came to be rejected. 4. It is specific contention of the petitioners that vide Government Resolution dated 06th December, 2005 and 25th September, 2006, various employees working in Ashram School in the State of Maharashtra who do not possess necessary qualification, were directed to be regularized from the date of their appointment. It is the specific contention of the petitioners that, when the services of so many employees have been regularized by the State Government, the act of the respondent No. 2 in refusing to grant absorption of the petitioners on the ground that they were not qualified and the appointments were not made as per the prescribed procedure of law, amounts to giving discriminatory treatment and thus violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 5. In the reply filed on behalf of respondents, it is stated that, the withdrawal of the recognition of the school in which the petitioners were working was on 11th March, 2005. It is specifically submitted that the Government Resolution which is issued subsequently i. e. on 25th September, 2006 could not made applicable to the petitioners in as much as on the date on which the 4 said Government Resolution was issued, the petitioners were no more in service and that Government Resolution is only applicable to the employees who were in service on that date. We find that the explanation given by the Government, is not correct in law. It can be seen that in the order of derecognition itself the respondent No. 2 has specifically directed that, all employees working in the school run by respondent No. 5 should be absorbed in some other Government or government aided school. It is not in dispute that, services of such of the employees who were not possessing necessary qualification, who were appointed during the period when the petitioners were appointed have been regularized. When the services of similarly circumstanced persons were regularized by the State Government, the petitioners cannot be denied the benefit only on the ground that on the date on which the Government Resolutions were issued the petitioners were not in service. As already stated hereinabove, the order dated 11th March, 2005, which de-recognizes respondent No. 5, protects service of petitioners and directs their absorption in some other Government or aided private school. In that view of the matter, we find that stand taken by the Government is discriminatory and as such violation of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. When the services of similarly circumstanced persons have been regularized, who even according to the respondents were not possessing necessary qualification, we do not understand, as to why the petitioners were not absorbed only on the ground that they do not possess necessary qualification, when specifically in the order dated 11th March, 2005, the services of petitioners were directed to be absorbed in some other Government 5 or aided Ashram School. 6. We therefore, direct the respondents No. 2 to 4 to absorb the petitioners in any existing or newly established Government or aided private Ashram school on the same terms and conditions. It is further directed that services of the petitioners will be regularized from the date on which the petitioners were appointed on the same terms and condition as stipulated in Government Resolution dated 06th December, 2005 and 25th September, 2006. 7. However, it is made clear that, petitioners would not be entitled to claim any back wages. The orders of absorption shall be issued by the respondent No. 2 to 4 within a period of three months from today. On the petitioners being absorbed they would be at liberty to make representation to the respondent No. 2 to 4 for grant of continuity. Said representation would be considered in accordance with law and the aforesaid Government Resolutions. 8. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. There is no order as to costs. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ B. R. GAVAI, J.] bsb/Sept. 09