WP No. 4420/09 1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4420 OF 2009 Crescent Education Society Aurangabad Through its President Jalis Abdul Hamid, Age 55 yrs., Occu. President C.E.S. R/o. H.No. 18/2, Mandi Colony, Behind Takalkar Society, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad. ....Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, Higher & Technical Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad. 3. The Education Officer (Primary) Zilla parishad, Aurangabad. 4. Smt. Sayeeda Rubeena Quadri D/o. Sayeed Ataullah Quadri, Age 27 yrs., Occu. Service, R/o. Heena Nagar, Plot No. 72, Rashidpura, Near Singapur Bekari, Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad. 5. Head Mistress, Aurangabad Urdu Primary School, Rashidpura, Manju Hill, Aurangabad. ....Respondents. Mr. S.W. Munde, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. K.J. Ghute-Patil, A.G.P. for respondent/State. Mr. Dilip Bankar-Patil, Advocate for respondent No. 3. Mr. S.S. Kazi, Advocate for respondent No. 4. WP No. 4420/09 2 CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL & T. V. NALAWADE, JJ. Dated : 13th October, 2011. ORDER : [ PER T. V. NALAWADE, J. ] 1. This petition is filed under Articles 226 and 227 of Constitution of India by the petitioner - Education Society for getting grant-in-aid in respect of two divisions started by it in the year 2000-2001. Both the sides are heard. 2. To the petitioner second division was sanctioned for 4th standard and second division was sanctioned for 5th standard from academic year 2000-01. As per the approval, the petitioner was to get grand of 20% amount from the 5th year i.e. from the year 2004-05. It is contended that in view of the approval, teachers were appointed and the appointments of teachers were also approved by the respondents. 3. It is the case of the petitioner that the correspondence was made with the respondents for getting grant-in-aid in respect of salary and other expenditure, but no response was given to the representations made in this regard. At the time of argument, it was submitted that the proceeding was pressed only for getting WP No. 4420/09 3 grant-in-aid in respect of second division of 5th Standard for the period from 2004-05 to 2008-09. The second division of 4th standard was abolished in the year 2005 itself and the second division of 5th standard came to be closed in the year 2009. 4. The Education Officer, respondent No. 3, has filed an affidavit-in-reply. It is contended by respondent No. 3 that no salary grant in respect of respondent No. 4, teacher, can be granted as respondent No. 4 was working on second division of 4th standard which came to be closed in the year 2005 itself. In affidavit-in-reply filed for respondent Nos. 1 and 2, it is contended that the grant-in-aid could have been given only after fulfilling the conditions laid down in the Government Resolutions issued in that regard. It was submitted that for each division, the strength is atleast 40 and when the school had informed that it had 81 students in the year 2004-05, during inspection it transpired that only 61 students were available for verification in 5th standard. Copies of reports in respect of inspection in this regard are produced. 5. In addition to aforesaid circumstances, there is one more circumstance. The respondent No. 4, teacher, had filed Writ Petition No. 1872/2008 against the employer, the present WP No. 4420/09 4 petitioner and in that proceeding, this Court [ Coram : F.I. Rebello and K.U. Chandiwal, JJ. ] had given direction to the employer to pay salary. She was declared as surplus on 14.7.2005. 6. In view of the aforesaid circumstances, this Court holds that there is no question of invoking extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court and the petition stands rejected. [ T. V. NALAWADE, J.] [ NARESH H. PATIL, J.] ssc/