1 609910 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6099 OF 2010 Balkrishna S/o. Damodhar Wagh & Ors. ...Petitioners V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Mr. J.G. Reddy with Mr. Ajay Pawar for the Petitioner Mr. Samir Patil, A.G.P., for the Respondents. CORAM: A.M. KHANWILKAR AND MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, JJ. DATE: 31ST MARCH, 2011 P.C.:- Heard the counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. The learned A.G.P. waives service of the Rule for the respondents. By consent, heard forthwith. 3. The relief claimed in this petition is to issue direction to the respondents to grant time-bound promotion or higher pay-scale to the petitioners immediately after completion of the 12 years’ qualifying 2 609910 service from the dates of their initial appointments and grant all consequential benefits that might accrue to the petitioners. Further direction is sought against the respondents to re-fix the pay-scale of the petitioners in the light of judgment of Aurangabad Bench of our High Court in Writ Petition No. 2362 of 2009 on 21st April, 2009 and Writ Petition No. 3295 of 2010 decided on 13th July, 2010, and grant all the consequential benefits, including restoration of higher pay-scale and difference on account of re-fixation of pay-scale and consequential reliefs. 4. The fact that the petitioners were appointed in recognized schools is not in dispute. Indeed, the grant-in-aid facility was extended to the said school from year 1999-2000. That, however, can be no basis to deny the benefits of time-bound promotion or higher pay-scale to the petitioners whose appointments were otherwise regular and legal in other respects. 5. This issue has been directly considered and answered by the Aurangabad Bench of our High Court in the case of Dattatraya Ramchandra Chaudhari & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., in Writ Petition No. 6756 of 2008 and companion matters, including Writ 3 609910 Petition No. 2362 of 2009, decided on 21st April, 2009. Paragraphs 4 and 5 of the said decision read thus:- “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 salary to be paid in August 2009. Save and except these directions, writ petition disposed of.” The case of the petitioners is similar to the petitioners in the said matters. As a result, the authorities are bound to apply the same principles to the petitioners before this Court. 6. We, therefore, allow this Writ Petition, with direction to respondents No. 2 and 3 to examine the claim of the petitioners, keeping in mind the observations in the above-said decision and the decision in Writ Petition No. 3295 of 2010 dated 13th July, 2010, and extend such reliefs, to which the petitioners are entitled, in accordance with law. 4 609910 That shall be done as expeditiously as possible, in any case not later than twelve weeks from today. The petition is, accordingly, allowed on the same terms as ordered in Writ Petition No. 6756 of 2008 decided on 21st April, 2009, with no order as to costs. MRS. MRIDULA BHATKAR, J. A.M. KHANWILKAR, J.