Bombay High Court
Ram Rupa Rathod And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 14 March, 2018
Author: R. M. Borde
Bench: R.M.Borde, K.K. Sonawane
{1}
wp2779-18.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2779 OF 2018
1. Vasant s/o Thavara Rathod
age 43 years occ. service
2. Shivraj s/o Bhagwantrao Kendre
age 38 years, occ. service
3. Tanaji s/o Narayan Barhale
age 38 years, occ. service
4. Prakash s/o Tukaram RAthod
age 45 years, occ. service
5. Rajkumar s/o Baburao Bagalgave
age 44 years, occ. service
6. Mahadu s/o Varu Totre
age 45 years, occ. service
7. Subhash s/o Kashiram Rathod
age 43 years, occ. service
8. Balaji s/o Vishwanath Rukulwad
age 45 years, occ. service
All r/o Secondary Ashram School
Chincholi Atnur, Tq. Jalkot
Dist. Latur Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Social Welfare Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32.
2. The Director
V.J.N.T., OBC & SBC Special
Assistant Department,
Maharashtra State,
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2018 01:47:24 :::
{2}
wp2779-18.odt
Pune
3. The Regional Deputy Commissioner
Social Welfare,
Latur Division, Latur
4. The Assistant Commissioner
Social Welfare Department,
Latur.
5. The Head Master
Secondary Ashram School
Chincholi Atnur, Tq.Jalkot
dist. Latur.
6. The Head Master
Primary Ashram School
Chinholi Atnur, Tq. Jalkot
Dist. Latur Respondents
Mr. G.J. Karne, advocate for petitioners.
Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondents 1 to 4.
Mr. R.W. Tidke, advocate for respondents 5 and 6.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1365 OF 2018
1. Ram s/o Rupa Rathod
age 38 years, occ. cook
2. Arun s/o Bibhshan Dudhbhate
age 38 years, occ. Superintendent
3. Sambhaji s/o Khanduji More
age 44 years, occ. cook
4. Vishesh s/o Dhondiba Mungal
age 47 years, occ. helper
5. Rajudas s/o Ramdhan Chavan
age 37 years, occ. Kamathi
All r/o Primary Ashram School
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2018 01:47:24 :::
{3}
wp2779-18.odt
Kakandi, Tq. & Dist. Nanded. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Social Justice and Special Help
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 32.
2. The Director
V.J.N.T. O.B.c. & S.B.C. Special
Help Department, Maharashtra State
Pune.
3. The Divisional Deputy Commissioner
Social Welfare, Latur
4. The Assistant Commissioner
Social Welfare Department
Nanded
Tq. & Dist. Nanded Respondents
Mr. D.S. Kudale, advocate for petitioners.
Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondents.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 1371 OF 2018
1. Vivekanand s/o Kahnderao Lawte
age 51 years, occ. Superintendent
2. Narayan s/o Harischandra Rasure
age 37 years, occ. Jr. Clerk
3. Kawalbai Bhimrao Holgir
age 42 years, occ. cook
4. Umakant s/o Namdeo Aapte
age 42 years, occ. cook
5. Sangita Shivaji Gangotri
age 43 years, occ. helper
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2018 01:47:24 :::
{4}
wp2779-18.odt
6. Dnyaneshwar s/o Nagorao Kamble
age 40 years, occ. Kamathi
All r/o Watsiddh Nagnath
Primary Ashram School
Wadwal, Tq. Chakur
Dist. Latur. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary
Social Justice and Special Help
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 32.
2. The Director
V.J.N.T. O.B.c. & S.B.C. Special
Help Department, Maharashtra State
Pune.
3. The Divisional Deputy Commissioner
Social Welfare, Latur
4. The Assistant Commissioner
Social Welfare Department
Latur
Tq. & Dist. Latur Respondents
Mr. D.S. Kudale, advocate for petitioners.
Mr. P.K. Lakhotiya, AGP for respondents.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
DATE : 14th MARCH, 2018
ORAL JUDGMENT : ( PER R. M. BORDE, J. )
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard finally with the consent of learned counsel for the ::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2018 01:47:24 ::: {5} wp2779-18.odt respective parties.
3. The issue raised in these petitions is no more res integra and is covered by the decision rendered by this Court in Writ Petition No.7256/2011 and other companion matters decided on 2nd December 2013 as well as decision of the Division Bench at Mumbai in Writ Petition No. 2358/2013 and other companion matters decided on 21st September, 2013.
4. In the facts of this case and in view of the judgments referred above, writ petitions deserve to be allowed and the same are accordingly allowed. Respondents are directed to examine the case of each of the individual petitioners for deciding whether they satisfy the criteria laid down under ACPS scheme applicable to private aided government schools under the Government Resolution dated 30.04.1998 as amended from time to time and, if it is found that petitioners are entitled to claim benefits under the scheme and they satisfy the eligibility criteria, respondents shall extend the benefits to them. Respondents shall scrutinise case of the individual petitioners within a period of six months and extend the benefits to the eligible petitioner as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of four months from such scrutiny.
5. Rule made absolute in above terms. No costs.
K. K. SONAWANE R.M.BORDE
JUDGE JUDGE
dyb
::: Uploaded on - 15/03/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 16/03/2018 01:47:24 :::