AJN 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8459 OF 2008 Smt. Farzana Chand Shaikh ... Petitioner Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents Mr. P.G. Chavan for the petitioner. Mr. V.S. Masurkar, A.G.P. for respondent 1. Ms. Manisha Jagtap i/b M/s. J. Shekhar & Co. for respondents 2 and 3. CORAM : SMT. RANJANA DESAI & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 29TH AUGUST, 2009. P.C.:- 1. The petitioner is a teacher. She is D.Ed. She has prayed that a direction be given to the respondents to issue orders to appoint her as Assistant Primary Teacher – Shikshan Sevak with respondents 2 and 3. AJN 2 2. The case of the petitioner is that respondents 2 and 3 appointed her by oral orders in November, 1997 in the post of Primary Teacher. Her case is that though she is qualified and she worked continuously with respondents 2 and 3 and though there were vacancies, she was not absorbed in service by them. On the contrary, her services were orally terminated. 3. It appears that several orders have been passed by this court in petitions filed by similarly situated persons giving direction that they should be considered for appointment as Shikshan Sevaks. 4. Learned counsel for the parties are agreed that the petitioner’s case is covered by those judgments, more particularly judgment in Writ Petition No.9412 of 2004 and companion writ petitions decided by the Division Bench presided over by Justice F.I. Rebello dated 29/4/2005 and by judgment of this court dated 8/2/2006 in Writ Petition No.4833 of 2005 AJN 3 (Shinde Amit Tanaji & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) where directions were given to consider the petitioners therein for appointment as Shikshan Sevaks. It is also pointed out to us that in judgment dated 29/4/2005 passed in Writ Petition No. 9412 of 2004 and companion writ petitions, this court had directed that considering the fact that the petitioners therein were appointed on honorary basis in the year 1999 and were in service till their oral termination in 2001, their cases should be considered by respondent 1 for appointment as Shikshan Sevaks if they possess requisite qualification for the post of Primary Teacher i.e. D.Ed. 5. In this case, the petitioner is D.Ed. She was appointed in November, 1997. She was continuously working with respondents 2 and 3 till her oral termination. Besides, in the affidavit in reply filed by Mr. Kishor Krishnarao Patil, Office Superintendent of Nashik Municipal School Board, Nashik, respondent 3 herein, it is AJN 4 stated that there are three vacancies in Nashik Municipal School, Nashik. In the circumstances, we direct the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as Shikshan Sevak if she possesses requisite qualification for the post of Primary Teacher. 6. The petition is disposed of in the aforestated terms. [SMT. RANJANA DESAI, J.] [A.A. SAYED, J.]