Shri Ramesh Son Of Mahadeo … vs Education Officer (Secondary) … on 2 March, 2010

                                    1

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY:
                        NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR




                                                                          
                      WRIT PETITION NO.517 OF 2010




                                                  
    PETITIONER:
          Shri Ramesh son of Mahadeo Rajurkar, aged about 53 years,
          occupation : Teacher, resident of Plot No.43, Sanmarg Nagar,




                                                 
          Hudkeshwar Road, Nagpur.
                                 VERSUS
    RESPONDENTS:



                                       
    1]    Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.
                          
    2]    Uday Shikshan Sanstha Parwati Nagar, Nagpur through its
          Secretary
                         
    3]    State of Maharashtra through its Secretary, Education
          Department, Mantralaya, Bombay 400 032.
       

    ================================================
    Shri A.Shelat, advocate for petitioner
    



    Shri S.J. Jichkar, AGP for respondent no.1 & 3
    Shri C.A. Joshi, advocate for respondent no.2
    ================================================





    CORAM: S.A. BOBDE & SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, JJ.

DATE: 2ND MARCH, 2010
ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER : S.A. BOBDE, J.]
Rule returnable forthwith. Heard by consent.

2] The petitioner has challenged the order dated 7.1.2010 passed

by the Education Officer, requiring the management to fill in the

post of Head Master on the basis of reservation.

::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 15:39:46 :::
2

3] The respondent no.2 is running two schools namely Jeevan

Shikshan Vidyalaya, Unt Khana, Nagpur and Jeevan Shikshan

Vidyalaya, Parwati Nagar, Nagpur. Said schools are admitted to

100% grants from the state government. Each school has one

Headmaster. Thus the cadre of Headmaster bears only two posts.

4] By the impugned order on 7.1.2010 the Education Officer

issued a letter to the management – respondent no.2 stating that the

petitioner is granted administrative and financial powers temporary

so that the management of the school is saved from financial and

administrative difficulties. The Education Officer has however,

asked the respondent no.2 to fill up the post as per reservation.

Powers of the petitioner have been restricted only for the period

from 1.11.2009 to 31.1.2010. Petitioner has thus challenged the

directions of the Education Officer.

5] Shri Shelat, learned counsel for the petitioner has relied on

the judgment delivered by the Full Bench of this Court, reported in

2006(6) Mh.L.J. 882 [New English High School Association,

Nagpur & another ..vs.. Baldev s/o Fakira Ade], wherein this court

has held as under:

“28- The fall out of the above discussion is that in

case the cadre consists of three or less number of
posts and the total percentage of reservation is 24%,
there cannot be any reservation in such a case and it
would be only in case of four posts that one of those

will have to be filled in by the reserved category
candidate. The applicability of the reservation policy
would depend upon the number of posts in a cadre
and the percentage of reservation. The 50 point roster

can be made applicable only when the applicability
thereof would not result in implementation of

reservation policy in excess of the percentage
statutorily prescribed for the reserved category

candidates. ”

Thus the impugned letter of the Education Officer is contrary to law

since it calls upon the respondent – management to apply principle

of reservation even though the number of posts are only 2 and the

permissible percentage for reservation is 33%. Hence the petition

is allowed. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.

                            JUDGE             JUDGE





    smp.




                                                  ::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 15:39:46 :::