Bombay High Court
Madhukar Yadavrao Ingle vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 15 April, 2016
Author: S.S. Shinde
Bench: S.S. Shinde
1 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1002 OF 2016
Ramling s/o. Amrutrao Patil
and 33 others ..Petitioners
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 13 others
ig ..Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1025 OF 2016
Sopan s/o. Purushotam Patil
and others ..Petitioners
versus
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 04 others ..Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.1001 OF 2016
Madhukar s/o. Yadavrao Ingle ..Petitioner
versus
::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 :::
2 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt
The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Social Justice and Special Help,
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32
and 04 others ..Respondents
--
In all petitions :
Mr.A.D.Pawar, advocate for petitioners
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, for respondents - State
--
ig CORAM : S.S. SHINDE AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 15, 2016
ORAL ORDER :
Heard.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, the petition is taken up for final hearing at admission stage.
3. The petitioners are the employees of private aided Ashram Schools, which are made respondents in the present Writ Petitions. The petitioners are claiming their entitlement to higher pay scale ::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 ::: 3 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt under Assured Career Progress Scheme (for short 'the ACPS') on completion of 12 years of qualifying service from the respective dates of their initial appointments.
4. It is the contention of the petitioners that the employees serving in private aided Ashram Schools are discriminated and have been denied benefits under the ACPS, whereas the said benefits are made available to the Ashram Schools conducted by the Social Welfare Department, and other private aided schools conducted by other Departments.
5. The issue raised in the petition is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Division Bench delivered at the Principal Seat of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No.2358/2013 and other companion matters decided on 21st September, 2013.
The Division Bench in paragraph nos. 17 to 19 of the order has observed thus:-
::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 :::4 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt "17. The Assured Career Progress Scheme is a welfare scheme which is basically brought about to remove stagnation as very few promotion avenues are available to Group `C"
and `D" employees. The ACPS enables the eligible employees to be placed in higher pay scale. The eligible non-teaching staff of the aided Secondary Schools in Group `C' and `D' category gets the benefit of ACPS. But the similar category of employees in the aided private Ashram Schools who perform identical duties have been denied the benefit of ACPS which infringes their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The action of denial of benefits to the similarly placed employees discharging similar duties is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
18. Only on the basis of purported ground of financial crunch, we fail to understand the ::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 ::: 5 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt approach of the State Government of discriminating between the non-teaching staff of aided Ashram Schools and non-teaching staff of aided private Schools. At one stage both the Schools were functioning under the control of only one department.
19. In our view the denial of benefit of ACPS amounts to discrimination, which is hit by the rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India."
6. In view of the decision rendered by the Division Bench, referred to above, the present petition deserves to be allowed, and the same is accordingly allowed.
7. The respondents are directed to examine the case of each individual petitioner for deciding whether, they satisfy the criteria laid down for ::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 ::: 6 26-wp1002-16 and ors.odt claiming benefits under the ACPS to the private aided schools under the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1998, as modified from time to time, and if it is found that the petitioners are entitled to claim benefits under the ACPS and if they satisfy the eligibility criteria, the respondents shall extend the benefits to the petitioners. The respondents shall scrutinize the case of individual petitioner within a period of six months and extend the benefits to such of the petitioners who are found eligible, as expeditiously as possible, preferably, within a period of six months from such scrutiny.
8. Rule made absolute in the above terms. The writ petitions stand disposed of accordingly.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.] kbp ::: Uploaded on - 27/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 22:27:40 :::