1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3295 OF 2010 1. Pravin S/o Mangu Salunke, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Anchale, Tq. and Dist. Dhule. 2. Jeebhau S/o Dharma Khanderao, Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Anchale, Tq. and Dist. Dhule. 3. Bhagwan S/o Lukdu Shinde, Age : 33 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Anchale, Tq. and Dist. Dhule. 4. Sanjay S/o Nagraj Patil, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Tulshiram Nagar, Plot No. 37, Deopur, Dhule. 5. Rajendra S/o Khivraj Varma, Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o HUDCO, Chalisgaon Road, Dhule. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, 2 Through Education and Employment Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Dhule. 3. The Accounts Officer, Education Department (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Dhule. .. .. Respondents Shri A. D. Pawar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri K. J. Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondents/State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3912 OF 2010 1. Durwas S/o Rajaram Sonawane, Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Duskheda, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon. 2. Prakash S/o Bhagwat Sonwane, Age : 38 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Duskheda, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon. 3. Narayan S/o Namdeo Tokre, Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Duskheda, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon. 4. Mahendra S/o Shantaram Patil, 3 Age : 34 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Adgaon, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon. 5. Rajendra S/o Bhika Patil, Age : 33 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Adgaon, Tq. Yawal, District Jalgaon. 6. Dilip S/o Bhagwat Patil, Age : 37 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Khedi Bhokri, Tq. Chopda, District Jalgaon. 7. Shaikh Quadeerur Rehman Mahibur Rehman, Age : 43 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Pahur, Tq. Jamner, District Jalgaon. 8. Azam Khan S/o Umer Khan, Age : 52 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Pahur, Tq. Janmer, District Jalgaon. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Education and Employment Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Education Officer (Secondary) 4 Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. 3. The Accounts Officer, Education Department (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. .. .. Respondents Shri A. D. Pawar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. K. Kadam, A.G.P. for the Respondents/State. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 4499 OF 2010 1. Gautam S/o Samrat Ahire, Age : 42 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Suresh Jain Nagar, Tungasa Building NO. 34/5, Jalgaon, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon. 2. Pratap S/o Damu Sonwane, Age : 39 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Maharana Pratap Housing society, Sai Nagar, Chalisgaon, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. 3. Dnyaneshwar S/o Bhagwan Patil, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Borkhede (Pirache), Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. 4. Raibhan S/o Arjun Patil, Age : 51 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Borkhede (Pirache), Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon. 5 5. Sanjay S/o Tukaram Dutonde, Age : 41 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Shantinath Nagar, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon. 6. Prakash S/o Namdeo Shelke, Age : 43 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o 15 Block, M.A.P. 527/D, Varangaon Road, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, Dist. Jalgaon. 7. Dhanraj S/o Suklal Nayde, Age : 40 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o Wanjola Road, Kanhyalal Plot, Bhusawal, Tq. Bhusawal, District Jalgaon. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Education and Employment Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. 3. The Accounts Officer, Education Department (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. .. .. Respondents Shri A. D. Pawar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri K. J. Ghute Patil, A.G.P. for the Respondents/State. 6 WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 5093 OF 2010 1. Vishwas S/o Pandit Patil, Age : 47 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Fagne, Tq. & Dist. Dhule. 2. Jagdish S/o Vedu Bagal, Age : 44 Years, Occu. : Service, R/o At Post Hole, Tq. Sindhkheda, Dist. Dhule. .. .. Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through Education and Employment Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 2. The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Dhule. 3. The Accounts Officer, Education Department (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Dhule. .. .. Respondents Shri A. D. Pawar, Advocate for Petitioners. Smt. A. V. Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for the Respondents/State. CORAM : P. V. HARDAS AND N. D. DESHPANDE, JJ. 7 DATE : 13TH JULY, 2010. ORAL JUDGMENT [Per P. V. HARDAS, J. ] : . Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for parties these petitions are heard finally and are being decided by this common judgment, since the reliefs claimed for in these petitions are similar. 2. Petitioners in all these petitions pray for issuance of a writ directing the respondents to grant time bound promotion on higher pay scale in favour of petitioners immediately upon petitioners completing 12 years qualifying service from the date of their initial appointments and grant all other consequential benefits which might have granted to them. The petitioners further pray for directing the respondents to re-fix the pay scale of the petitioners in the light of the judgment of this Court in Writ Petition No. 4346/2000 and Writ Petition No. 3157/2005 and other connected matters. 3. We need not advert to the facts of the present case as it would suffice to state that the challenge raised in the present petitions was similar to the challenge raised in a group of petitions namely Writ Petition No. 6756/2008 Dattatraya 8 Ramchandra Chaudhari and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others, which came to be decided by the Division Bench of this Court by its judgment dated 21st April 2009. We may at this juncture advert to paragraph 4 and 5 of the said judgment which reads as under : 4. We, therefore, dispose of the writ petitions by recording two observations at the cost of repetition - (1) Even non teaching staff of private schools is entitled to benefit of "Time Bound Promotion" as promulgated in GRs dated 23.07.1998 and 28.11.2006 and (2) Completion of 12 years service is to be reckoned from the individual joining in the particular cadre. The services need not be reckoned from the date school is brought on grantable basis. 5. With these observations we direct the respondents to consider the claims of all the petitioners for "Time Bound Promotion" at an early date in accordance with the Government Resolutions applicable, which are referred herein above. In any case the petitioners should know the result on or before 30th June 2009. We direct the respondents to ensure that financial benefits, to which the petitioners will be entitled to, should be available to them latest with their July 9 salary to be paid August 2009. Save and except these directions, writ petition disposed of. 4. The aforesaid judgment of the Division Bench felt for consideration of this Division Bench in Writ Petition No. 5163/2009 Chunilal Shivaji Shelar and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others and other accompanied petitions. The Division Bench of this Court by relying upon the judgment referred to above allowed these petitions by judgment dated 10th September, 2009. 5. Undisputedly, the petitioners are working as non teaching employees working in various private schools. The Division Bench in no uncertain terms has held that the employees who are non teaching staff would also be entitled to the benefit of time bound promotion scale. The Division Bench has further directed that the services of 12 years is to be reckoned from the date of the employee joining the service and not from the date when the school is brought on grantable basis. Learned counsel for parties agreed that the controversy in the present petition stand fully answered by the judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Petition No. 6756/2008 Dattatraya Ramchandra 10 Chaudhari and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others. In that light of the matter, therefore, we allow these petitions and direct that the petitioners would be entitled for time bound promotion scale as promulgated in Government Resolution dated 23.07.1998 and Government Resolution dated 28.11.2006 and the service of 12 years is to be reckoned from the petitioners joining the particular cadre and not from the date the school is brought on grantable basis. We therefore, direct the respondents to consider the claims of the petitioners for time bound promotion, in accordance with law and to grant them said benefit and other consequential benefits flowing there from, if the petitioners are otherwise eligible. If the petitioners are found to be eligible to be granted benefit of time bound promotion same be extended to them as expeditiously as possible. 6. Rule is thus made absolute on the above terms with no order as to costs. [ N. D. DESHPANDE, J.] [ P. V. HARDAS, J.] bsb/July 10