Bombay High Court
Sadik Bashir Pathan And Anothers vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anothers on 21 October, 2020
Author: Prasanna B. Varale
Bench: Prasanna B. Varale, Mangesh S. Patil
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12238 OF 2017
1. Arvind s/o Dattarao Tupkari,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Hadgaon,
Tal. & Dist. Nanded
2. Babu s/o Lakshman Javale,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Yehlegaon (Tukaram),
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli
3. Anita w/o Bhaskar Patil,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o C/o. Nitin Vijayrao Sagar,
Sant Gadgebaba Nagar, Pachoye,
Tq. Pachod, Dist. Jalgaon
4. Mayadevi w/o Ramdas Patil,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
c/o Dattatray Sadashiv Patil,
At Post Lohari (B), Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon
5. Dnyaneshwar s/o Arjun Pawar,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
At post Gorad Kheda (B),
Tq. Pachori, Dist. Jalgaon
6. Rahul Kumar s/o Dharamraj Ahire,
Age: 25 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Plot No.11, Bhaskar Nagar,
Bhadgaon Road, Pachora,
Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon
Umesh Malani Page 1 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
7. Bhagwat s/o Shivaji Patil,
Age: 49 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Babrud, Tq. Bhadgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon
8. Hansraj s/o Ramesh Patil,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Bhatkhande (U),
Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon
9. Chandrakant s/o Kashinath Patil,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Jalgaon, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon
10. Himmat s/o Rambhau Patil,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Saatgaon (D),
Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon
11. Prashant s/o Sahebrao Patil,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Shindad, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon
12. Jayshree w/o Rohidas Wagh,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Krishnapuri, Tq. Pachora,
Dist. Jalgaon
13. Pradeep s/o Janardhan Mali,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Kulhad Yurde,
Tq. Pachora, Dist. Jalgaon
14. Dharma s/o Kalyanrao Khapre,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Dhungarde Hapgaon,
Umesh Malani Page 2 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna
15. Kisan s/o Bhanudas Paval,
Age: 37 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Parner, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna
16. Namdev s/o Babanrao Wagh,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Karjat, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna
17. Padghan s/o Bhagwan Manikrao,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Pachod, Tq. Paithan,
Dist. Aurangabad
18. Gajanan s/o Vitthalrao Natkar,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Patharwala (B), Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna
19. Kirtinand s/o Motilal Gangurde,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At post Vadigondri, Tq. Ambad,
Dist. Jalna
20. Dnyaneshwar s/o Mugaji Londhe,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. AT post Ghansavangi, Dist. Jalna
21. Ramdas s/o Vishnu Khoje,
Age: 25 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. At Jogladevi, Ramasgaon,
Tq. Ghansavangi, Dist. Jalna
22. Dattatray s/o Digambar Udhaan,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 3 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o Kandhari, at post Antembhi,
Tq. Ghansavangi, Dist. Jalna
23. Pandarinath s/o Suryaji Mahajan,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School,
Marathi Vishvakh, Tq. Erandol,
Dist. Jalgaon
24. Ajabrao s/o Sheshrao Mhaske,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Fanka, Tq. and Dist. Hingoli
25. Sonaji s/o Sakharam Markad,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School, Lahegaon,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
26. Dutta s/o Kashinath Mahajan,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kanka, TQ. & Dist. Hingoli
27. Vilas s/o Panduranga Kanade,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad School, Ganeshwadi,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
28. Mohnish s/o Madhavrao Wadhve,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School, Vikasngar,
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli
29. Bhagwan s/o Ananda Londe,
Age: 26 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Central Primary School,
Incha, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
Umesh Malani Page 4 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
30. Satyavan s/o Tulshiram Gavte,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Shala, Paheti,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
31. Shila w/o Sampatrao Ghule,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Samga, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
32. Arvind s/o Rajiv Ingale,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kaka, TQ. & Dist. Hingoli
33. Priyanka w/o Rajiv Ingale,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Praishad School, Sangma,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
34. Vandana w/o Sakharam Ambhore,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Ganeshwadi, TQ. & Dist. Hingoli
35. Amardas s/o Ramkishan Dhongde,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Praishad Primary School,
Paheni, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
36. Gajanan s/o Kundalik Jagtap,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pangari, Centre-Incha,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
37. Mahadu s/o Fulaji Kele,
Umesh Malani Page 5 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pangari, Centre- Incha,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
38. Jagan s/o Vishwanath Ganjave,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pangari, Centre- Incha,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
39. Rameshwar S/o Bhagaji Gade,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Varud (Gavli), Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
40. Rameshwar s/o Malhari Korde,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Paheni, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
41. Chandrakant s/o Abhiman Patil,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School,
Borajanthi, Tq. Chopada,
Dist. Jalgaon
42. Padmakar s/o Santosh Koli,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School,
Borajanthi, Tq. Chopada,
Dist. Jalgaon
43. Shivaji s/o Suryabhan Suryavanshi,
Age: 48 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla parishad School, Mehdegaon,
Tq. Kalangnuri, Dist. Hingoli
Umesh Malani Page 6 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
44. Sandeep s/o Kishan Shivale,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School, Pimpaldari,
Tq. Aundha, Dist. Hingoli
45. Rajabai w/o Gundaji Ghogare,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Takalgaon, Tq. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
46. Anil s/o Dnyanoba Waghwase,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School, Takalgaon,
Tq. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
47. Shaikh Abdul s/o Phatar Mohd.,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Takalgaon, Tq. Ahmedpur,
Dist. Latur
48. Anand s/o Balaji More,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya
Primary School, Tq. Hippalgaon,
Dist. Latur
49. Prakash s/o Bhujangrao Mathe,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tadkalas, Tq. Purna, Dist. Parbhani
50. Jeevan s/o Keshavrao Ladekar,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla parishad High School,
Tadkalas, TQ. Purna, Dist. Parbhani
Umesh Malani Page 7 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
51. Bajrang s/o Dattarao Shingare,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Praishad High School,
Tadkalas, Tq. Purna, Dist. Parbhani
52. Krishna s/o Bajirao Dangde,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Udangaon, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
53. Sandu s/o Ramkisan Katkar,
Age: 25 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Andhari, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
54. Dnyaneshwar s/o Ashok Ghule,
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Chapaner, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
55. Purushottam s/o Rajdhar Patil,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Dhanwad, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon
56. Bhagwat s/o Tulsiram Bhavsar,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Dhanwad, Tq. & Dist. Jalgaon
57. Shashikant s/o Budho Bhalerao,
Age: 49 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Dhanwad, TQ. & Dist. Jalgaon
58. Sandeep s/o Jagannath Patil,
Age: 46 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Umesh Malani Page 8 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Paroda, Tq. Paroda, Dist. Jalgaon
59. Bhagyashree w/o Murlidhar More,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Paroda, Tq. Paroda, Dist. Jalgaon
60. Sunil s/o Dattatray Lohar,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Paroda, Tq. Paroda, Dist. Jalgaon
61. Samadhan s/o Bhaskar Patil,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Paroda, Tq. Paroda, Dist. Jalgaon
62. Pravin s/o Shantaram Mali,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher School,
Paroda, Tq. Paroda, Dist. Jalgaon
63. Arjun s/o Eknath Warwe,
Age: 47 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Nagaon (B), Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
64. Ravindra s/o Sukhash Kasar,
Age: 47 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sadavan Bud, Tq. Amalner,
Dist. Jalgaon
65. Vilas s/o Nagraj Patil,
Age: 46 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Devgaon-Devli, Tq. Amalner,
Dist. Jalgaon
Umesh Malani Page 9 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
66. Yogesh s/o Nana Patil,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Nagaon (B), Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
67. Mukesh s/o Prakash Lohar,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Nagaon (B), Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
68. Mukesh s/o Yuvraj Mahajan,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Devgaon-Devli, Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
69. Jayshree w/o Shantaram Patil,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sudavan (B), Tq. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon
70. Hari s/o Khanderao Gaike,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Central Primary School,
Post Maliwadgaon, Tq. Gangapur,
Dist. Aurangabad
71. Rekha w/o Rajendra Pawar,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Central Primary School,
Post Maliwadgaon, Tq. Gangapur,
Dist. Aurangabad
72. Manisha w/o Ramrao Thokal,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Central Primary School,
Post Maliwadgaon, Tq. Gangapur,
Dist. Aurangabad
Umesh Malani Page 10 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
73. Sandesh s/o Ratan Mahajan,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kanergaon Naka, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
74. Vilas s/o Ramrao Hanavte,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Vadad, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
75. Gangadhar s/o Bajirao Patil,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Chondhi (k), Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
76. Jagannath s/o Parasram Kondhe,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pimpre (V), Tq. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
77. Haribhau s/o Janardhan Shinde,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mannas Pimpre, Tq. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
78. Vinod s/o Ramchandra Gavande,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Devthana, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
79. Anil s/o Subhash Gavande,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kanergaon naka, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
80. Datta s/o Yandev Kondhe,
Umesh Malani Page 11 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pimpre (V), Tq. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
81. Mahadev s/o Trimbak Bhosale,
Age: 24 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School, Incha,
Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
82. Vilas s/o Maroti Aathavde,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kanergaon Naka, Tq. & Dist. Hingoli
83. Sopan s/o Ragho Tawde,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
Post : Physical Education Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bormal (T), Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
84. Sapkal s/o Kailas Daulat,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
Post : Craft Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bormal (T), Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
85. Shivram s/o Panditrao Age,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Craft Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Soygaon, Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
86. Sanjay s/o Motiram Lathe,
Age: 48 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
Umesh Malani Page 12 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bahulkheda, Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
87. Sachin s/o Narayan Kasar,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bahulkheda, Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
88. Anil s/o Tukaram Desai,
Age: 46 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Soygaon, Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
89. Mohini w/o Avinash Shisode,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Craft Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kanya School,
Soygaon, Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
90. Vikram s/o Vishnu Sonawane,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Art Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Nimbayati (T), Tq. Soygaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
91. Bhaulal s/o Ratilal Dhangar,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
R/o. Shaskiya Madhyamik Kanya
Ashram School, Vaijapur,
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
Umesh Malani Page 13 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
92. Rajesh s/o Bhayla Barela,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Craft Teacher,
R/o. Shaskiya Madhyamik Kanya
Ashram School, Vaijapur
Tq,. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
93. Vishwanath s/o Vyankat Patil,
Age: 50 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Senior Primary School,
Malshevage, Tq. Chalisgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon
94. Rajendra s/o Prakash Patil,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Craft Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Senior Primary School,
Malshevage, Tq. Chalisgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon
95. Sonali s/o Vasantrao Patil,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Art Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Senior Primary School,
Malshevage, Tq. Chalisgaon,
Dist. Jalgaon
96. Ashok s/o Baburao Rakde,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Craft Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Ghatambri, Tq. Shillod,
Dist. Aurangabad
97. Raju s/o Pandit Ulemale,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Umesh Malani Page 14 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Marsul, Tq. Malegaon, Dist. Washim
98. Vishal s/o Bhagwat Bali,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Karnaji, Tq. Malegaon, Dist. Washim
99. Shubhash s/o Waman Jadhav,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Khairkheda, Tq. Malegaon, Dist. Washim
100. Ashok s/o Isan Wanjari,
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sawarla, Tq. Pauni, Dist. Bhandara
101. Sangita Keda Sonawane,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School, Gadhejalgaon,
Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad
102. Vinod s/o Samadhan Bhagat,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
Shaskiya Madhyamik Ashram School,
Gangapuri, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
103. Vikas s/o Premraj Chavhan,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lihedigar, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
104. Narayan s/o Babu Chavan,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lihedigar, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
105. Vikas s/o Gabru Chavan,
Umesh Malani Page 15 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lihedigar, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
106. Pralhad s/o Madhav Bhadange,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Nandra (P), Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
107. Yogita Dattatrai Anvekar,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Vitnare, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
108. Satish s/o Prakash Chaudhari,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Motkheda Digar, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon
109. Amol s/o Raju Suradkar,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Ranjani, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
110. Sharad s/o Kaduba Shinde,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kekatnimbhora, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon
111. Mahesh s/o Ashok Chaudhari,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Maroda, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
112. Bapu s/o Kautik Khodke,
Age: 47 years, Occu: Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 16 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Malpimpri, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
113. Narendra s/o Ananda Suryavanshi,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Dohri (T), Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
114. Swapnil s/o Sambhaji Patil,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Gangapuri, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgoan
115. Ramchandra s/o Bhikka Survade,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Dohri (T), Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
116. Ujjwala Vilas Koli,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kinhale, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
117. Nilesh s/o Dattatrai Patil,
Age: 26 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Moyekheda, Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
118. Sunanda Jivram Chaudhari,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kekatnimbhora, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon
119. Navalsingh s/o Jhamsingh Rathod,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Aaheri (T), Tq. Jamner, Dist. Jalgaon
Umesh Malani Page 17 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
120. Chandoji s/o Rangrao Bele,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jalaldaba, Tq. Aundha, Dist. Hingoli
121. Shivprasad s/o Purbhaji Malvatkar,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lohara (B), Tq. Aundha,
Dist. Hingoli
122. Vinod s/o Sahebrao Chavhan,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Limbala (Tanda), Tq. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
123. Vinod s/o Mithu Jadhav,
Age: 26 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Trainer,
Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Limbala (Tanda), Tq. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
124. Munnalal s/o Bhaiyyalal Rahangajare,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Ambhora, Nagara, Tq. Gondiya,
Dist. Gondiya
125. Santosh s/o Ishwardasji Lanjevar,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
Post : Art Teacher,
R/o. Gondumari, Tq. Sakoli,
Dist. Bhandara
126. Shivaji s/o Gopinath Rathod,
Umesh Malani Page 18 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Partur, Borgaon Tanda, Tq. Ghansavangi,
Dist. Jalna
127. Dipika Tulshiram Patil,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Art Teacher,
R/o. Nilkanth Nagar, Old Jalana 431213
Nagar Parishad Primary School,
Chandansira, Tq. Jalna, Dist. Jalna
128. Gajanan s/o Manikrao Jinkalwar,
Age: 29 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Pohandul, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal 445204
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Dahisavali, TQ. Mahagaon,
Dist. Yavatmal
129. Sharada s/o Dnyaneshwar Khandare,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Chilgavhana, Amboda, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal
130. Jyoti Kisan Basavante,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Chilgavhana, Amboda, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal
131. Pradeep s/o Dashrath Gajabhar,
Age: 44 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Chilgavhana, Amboda, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal
132. Vishnupant s/o Baliram Jamkar,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 19 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Post: Art Teacher,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tivarang, Tq. Mahagaon,
Dist. Yavatmal
133. Avinash s/o Gulabrao Kadam,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
R/o. Malvakad, Kandori, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bhanv, Tq. Mahagaon, Dist. Yavatmal
134. Kishor s/o Badadu Jadhav,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
R/o Ghonsara, Mohdi, Mahagaon,
Yavatmal,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Ghonsara, Tq. Mahagaon,
Dist. Yavatmal
135. Sabir Khan s/o Khalil Khan,
Age: 29 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Nai abadi Mahoor, Mahoor,
Nanded 431721
Zilla Parishad Primary School (Urdu),
Mulava, Tq. Umarkhed,
Dist. Yavatmal
136. Amol s/o Uttamrao Bhagat,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Art Teacher,
R/o. Anjankhed, Mahoor, Nanded,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Gond Vadasa, Tq. Mahoor, Dist. Nanded
137. Bharat s/o Nagorao Nagose,
Umesh Malani Page 20 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
Post: Physical Education Teacher,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Karanji, Tq. Mahoor, Dist. Nanded
138. Kisan s/o Vitthal Chaudhari,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Karanji, Tq. Mahoor, Dist. Nanded
139. Sayyad Jafarhussain s/o Abdul Jabbar,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Gondvadasa, Tq. Mahoor,
Dist. Nanded 431721
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Gond Vadasa, Tq. Mahoor,
Dist. Nanded
140. Umakant s/o Gangadharrao Hampole,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Diwashi (Khurd), Diwashi (Bk.),
Bhokar, Nanded,
Zilla Parishad Primary School, Sarsam (B),
Tq. Himayatnagar, Dist. Nanded
141. Shalini Satavaji Chavare,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Parmeshwar Galli, Himayatnagar,
Nanded,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Himayatnagar, Tq. Himayatnagar,
Dist. Nanded
142. Anil s/o Dattatray Bhone,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Kali, Mahagaon, Yavatmal,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Savargaon (Gore), TQ. Pusad,
Umesh Malani Page 21 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Dist. Yavatmal
143. Ramvilas s/o Kashiram Rathod,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Paradh, Mokhad, Tq. Pusad,
Dist. Yavatmal,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Paradh, Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal
144. Uttamrao s/o Lobha Rathod,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Lakhi, Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal,
Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lakhi, Tq. Pusad, Dist. Yavatmal
145. Sayyad Ashraf Ali s/o Sayyad Mohommad Ali,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. T-Point Mahoor, Tq. Mahoor, Dist. Nanded
Zilla Parishad Primary School (Urdu),
Umarkhed, Tq. Umarkhed,
Dist. Yavatmal
146. Dilip s/o Bhimrao Jadhav,
Age: 51 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Bhaigaon,
Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
147. Kale Mahada Vishramji,
Age: 46 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Bhaigaon,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
148. Ramkisan s/o Suryabhan Pawar,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jatgaon,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
149. Popat s/o Kadam Changdev,
Umesh Malani Page 22 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jatgaon,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
150. Dattatraya s/o Vedu Theng,
Age: years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jatgaon,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
151. Sunil s/o Lakshman Alhat,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Vaghnagaon,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
152. Bharat s/o Hira Jadhav,
Age: 44 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Shirodi,
Tal: Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
153. Prakash s/o Sahebrao Matsagar,
Age: Major, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jarul,
Tal: Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
154. Vijaykumar s/o Madhavrao Kalyane,
Age: 37 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Varvti,
Tal: Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
155. Sandhya s/o Mahaungappa Karyakar,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kingaon,
Tal: Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
156. Vishnu s/o Udhur Mundhe,
Age: Nil, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kingaon,
Tal: Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
Umesh Malani Page 23 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
157. Shaikh M. Khaja M. Yusuf,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School Urdu New
Aabadi, Tal: Ardhapur, Dist. Nanded
158. Gauskhan Khurshid Khan,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary
Girls School, Tal. Ardhapur,
Dist. Nanded
159. Bapurao s/o Mohanrao Jamdade,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary
Girls School, Tal. Ardhapur,
Dist. Nanded
160. Sanjay s/o Mohanrao Jamdade,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Garul,
Tal. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
161. M. Rijwan s/o M. Usman Shaikh,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Bahul Kheda, Garandi,
Tal. Soygaon, Dist. Aurangabad
162. Amol s/o Diliprao Ujankar,
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Andholi,
Tal. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
163. Shekurao s/o Babarao Vadute,
Age: 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Andholi,
Tal. Ahmedpur, Dist. Latur
Umesh Malani Page 24 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
164. Baburao s/o Kabira Dandekar,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Tikhari,
Tal. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli
165. Raghunath s/o Sakru Chavhan,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Palsona,
Tal. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli
166. Vijay s/o Ganeshrao Gadade,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Kherda,
Tal. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli
167. Varsha Hiralalra Ravle,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kanergaon,
Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
168. Ramesh s/o Ramaji Patil,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Khalki, Tal. Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon
169. Kedarling s/o Dattatraya Aadhalkar,
Age: 35 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Khalki, Tal. Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon
170. Datta s/o Gyanuji Khode,
Age: 49 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Kadoli, Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
171. Dipali Shantaram Patil,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jogeshwari,
Umesh Malani Page 25 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Tal. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad
172. Harish s/o Vitthal Khapare,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Ratnamala, Tal. Gondia,
Dist. Gondia
173. Premkumar s/o Vilas Patle,
Age: 26 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Karanji, Tal. Angurli, Dist. Gondia
174. Vaibhav s/o Vijay Parate,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Dangurli, Tal. Gondia, Dist. Gondia
175. Kailas s/o Namdeorao Dabhade,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Murukhada,
Tal. Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad
176. Shriram s/o Tukaram Naik,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Potra,
Tal. Beed, Dist. Beed
177. Shyamrao s/o Daulatrao Kumavat,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Sheri, Tal. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon
178. Anita Raghunath Yeduba,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Sheri, Tal. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon
Umesh Malani Page 26 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
179. Kailas s/o Kaduba Jauk,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Sheri, Tal. Dharangaon, Dist. Jalgaon
180. Prakash s/o Dagadu Kandare,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Chikhari,
Tal. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli
181. Sitaram s/o Yeduba Katkar,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Phulandi,
Tal. Phulambri, Dist. Aurangabad
182. Anita Raghunath Kadam,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jarul,
Tal. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
183. Subhash s/o Kacharu Nalawade,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Sakegaon,
Tal. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad
184. Ramdas s/o Babarao Avachar,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Sengaon,
Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
185. Bhagwat s/o Kashinath Phatangale,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Sengaon,
Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
186. Yogesh s/o Ranoji Wakale,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Umesh Malani Page 27 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Pankanergaon, Tal. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
187. Balaji s/o Vithhal Vabale,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Wadona, Tal. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
188. Bhagawat s/o Aatmaram Kolhal,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Kawatha, Tal. Sengoan, Dist. Hingoli
189. Sandip s/o Ramchandra Khodake,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Panpanergaon, Tal. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
190. Vijay s/o Vithoba Shinde,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Pipari,
Tal. Chingaon, Dist. Hingoli
191. Ramesh s/o Sambhaji Pradhan,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Shivani Kute, Tal. Sengoan,
Dist. Hingoli
192. Vithhal s/o Manikrao Jadhav,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Pipari,
Tal. Chingaon, Dist. Hingoli
193. Shravan s/o Tukaram Gavali,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 28 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Sengaon,
Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
194. Abhiman s/o Shriram Kute,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Shivni Kute, Tal. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
195. Sheshrao s/o Aanandrao Vabale,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Shivni Kute, Tal. Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli
196. Fazage Shriramm Parasaram,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Wadona, Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli
197. Chidanand s/o Manmathappa Jatte,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Hipparga, Tq. Lohari,
Dist. Osmanabad
198. Muktabai d/o Fulchand Dabade,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tq. Bamni, Dist. Osmanabad
199. Sambhaji s/o Narhari Hapse,
Age: 34 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Devlali,
Tq. Bhoom, Dist. Osmanabad
200. Moinhasan s/o Bashrojama Peerazade,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 29 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary Girls School,
Naldurg, Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmanabad
201. Ravikiran s/o Mhalappa Tigade,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Barul,
Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmanabad
202. Kanifnath s/o Bhaskarrao Patil,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Devlali,
Tq. Bhoom, Dist. Osmanabad
203. Sanjay s/o Namdev Adatrao,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tq. Karzakeda, Dist. Osmanabad
204. Dattatraya s/o Govindrao Jawale,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Parli,
Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmanabad
205. Rajendra s/o Mahadev Patil,
Age: 33 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tq. Karzakeda, Dist. Osmanabad
206. Raju s/o Bansilal Pawar,
Age: 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Murum,
Tq. Umarga, Dist. Osmanabad
207. Vishnu s/o Namdev Mule,
Age: 27 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Pimpalgav,
Tq. Karzakeda, Dist. Osmanabad
Umesh Malani Page 30 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
208. Geetanjali Bapurao Rathod,
Age: 24 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Gubala,
Tq. Ausa, Dist. Latur
209. Vishnu s/o Shivaji Dalvi,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Gubala,
Tq. Tuljapur, Dist. Osmananabd
210. Shankar s/o Sahebrao Deshmukh,
Age: 43 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School, Gubala,
Tq. Vadgaon, Dist. Osmanabad
211. Bhagyashali Jannardhan Nagargoje,
Age: years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Girls High School,
Tq. Parali (V), Dist. Beed
212. Ashok s/o Bhagwan Pasare,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad
213. Baliram s/o Shripati Shinde,
Age: 48 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kothla,
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad
214. Babruvan s/o Chatrabhuj Tambare,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Andora,
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad
215. Ujvla Udhavrao Shinde,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kothla,
Umesh Malani Page 31 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad
216. Mahananda Trimbakrao Kawade,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kunherwadi, Tq. Kalamb,
Dist. Osmanabad
217. Uma Ranganath Waghmode,
Age: 32 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pokhrapur, Tq. Mohol,
Dist. Solapur
218. Dayanand s/o Chandrakant Gajare,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mendha, Dist. Osmanabad
219. Ramdas s/o Bhanudas Ade,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Shingoli, Dist. Osmanabad
220. Rajendra s/o Bhagwan Janrao,
Age: 45 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School,
Wadgaon, Dist. Osmanabad
221. Vaijyantimala Shivaji Zalte,
Age: 28 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mhasla (Kd.), Tq. Tuljapur,
Dist. Osmanabad
222. Lumbini Chandrakant Malale,
Age: 36 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Umesh Malani Page 32 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Mhasla (Kd.), Tq. Tuljapur,
Dist. Osmanabad
223. Vithal s/o Yadavrao Khandu,
Age: 42 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mhasla (Kd.), Tq. Tuljapur,
Dist. Osmanabad
224. Dhanaji s/o Pralhad Khandalkar,
Age: 37 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mangrul, Tq. Tuljapur,
Dist. Osmanabad
225. Kamalakar s/o Kondhari Thombare,
Age: 41 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Barul, Tq. Tuljapur,
Dist. Osmanabad
226. Padmini Vishwanath Chandure,
Age: 38 years, Occu: Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lombata,
227. Avinash S/o Uttam Jadhav,
Age : 27 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mhasa (Kd). Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
228. Arun S/o Ramrao Deshmukh,
Age : 30 years, Occu. Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Mhasa (Kd). Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
229. Dinesh S/o Pomaji Waghmare,
Age : 30 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Girls High School,
Umesh Malani Page 33 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Kalamb, Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
230. Dhanaji S/o Ramroa Devkar,
Age: 29 years, Occu: Teachers,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School,
Khamaswadi, Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
231. Arwin S/o Rajendra Kute,
Age : 38 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Dahiphal,
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
232. Sharad S/o Balbhim Adsul,
Age : 34 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Itkur,
Tq. Kalamb, Dist. Osmanabad.
233. Dattatray S/o Sopanrao Igwe,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Korala,
Tq. Umarga, Dist. Osmanabad.
234. Rajaram S/o Gahininath Jadhav,
Age : 42 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Yenegur,
Tq. Umarga, Dist. Osmanabad.
235. Dattatray S/o Sadhu Rokde,
Age : 42 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Shirala,
Tq. Paranda, Dist. Osmanabad.
236. Chandrakanth S/o Pandurang Surose,
Age : 36 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Kodgao,
Tq. Paranda, Dist. Osmanabad.
237. Atul S/o Rajendra Kedkar,
Umesh Malani Page 34 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tq. Bamni, Dist. Osmanabad.
238. Rekha Ramchandra Kamble,
Age : 41 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Karamba,
Tq. Uttar Solapur, Dist. Solapur.
239. Pravin S/o Gopinath Kamble
Age : 36 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Madre,
Tq. South Solapur, Dist. Solapur.
240. Sanjaykumar S/o Mahadeo Bansode
Age : 37 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Kurghot,
Tq. South Solapur, Dist. Solapur.
241. Kuber S/o Bibhishan Jadhav
Age : 34 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Saundar,
Tq. Barshi, Dist. Solapur.
242. Vyankatesh S/o Vinayak Banasode,
Age : 23 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Mahur, Tal. Mahur, Dist. Nanded.
243. Vishal S/o Vilasrao Kannav,
Age : 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Mahur, Tal. Mahur, Dist. Nanded.
244. Yashpal S/o Ramrao Khandale,
Age : 38 years; Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Goregaon, Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli.
Umesh Malani Page 35 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
245. Dinkar S/o Tukaram Kavrakhe
Age : 44 years; Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School,
Kendra (Budruk), Tql : Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli.
246. Satish S/o Shriram Kavrakhe
Age : 43 years; Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School,
Kendra (Budruk), Tql : Sengaon,
Dist. Hingoli.
247. Ershad Ahemedkhan Mehmud Khan
Age : 36 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School Urdu School,
Shekal Pimpari, Tal. Pusad, Dist. Yeotmal.
248. Bhimrao S/o Rajaram Pathade,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primay School,
Shirsam (B), Tq. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
249. Kishor S/o Narayan Rasal,
Age : 29 years: Occu : Nil,
R./o Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Malhitwada, Tal. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli.
250. Chatarkar Amita Sukhdeo,
Age : 23 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Pedgaon, Tql. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
251. Shurutika Dattatraya Basole
Age : 30 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Karajgala, Tql. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
252. Maroti S/o Anandrao Nirgude,
Umesh Malani Page 36 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age : 35 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Malhivara, Tql. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
253. Pamakar S/o Sopan Kamble,
Age : 37years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kherda, Tql. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
254. Sanjay S/o Fakirrao Markad,
Age : 32years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sirsam, Tql. Hingoli, Dist. Hingoli.
255. Amruta Chandrakant Jadhav
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Khandala, Tql. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli.
256. Ramkishan S/o Shamrao Deokar,
Age : 47 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Morwad, Tql. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
257. Deepak S/o Tukaram Paikrao,
Age : 43 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Morwad, Tql. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
258. Deokar S/o Ramprasad Massaro,
Age : 25 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Morwad, Tql. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
259. Ajaz Ahmed Waheedoddin,
Age : 44 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Rahati, Tql. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
Umesh Malani Page 37 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
260. Balaji S/o Shankarrao Butte,
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Jarikot, Tql. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
261. Sudarsham S/o Bhimrao Kamgonde,
Age : 36 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Jarikot, Tql. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
262. Gautam S/o Mariba Likade,
Age : 41 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Girls School,
Dharmabad Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
263. Swati Ashokrao Pupulwar,
Age : 31 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Dharmabad Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
264. Subhash S/o Hinganna Bardewas
Age : 42 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Yetala Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
265. Varsha Shankarrao Gundawar
Age : 32 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School,
Dharmabad Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
266. Nitin S/o Shankar Dharma
Age : 27 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary Girls School,
Dharmabad Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
267. Rathshila Eknath Waghmare
Age : 31 years, Occu : Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 38 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary Girls School,
Dharmabad Tq.. Dhamrabad, Dist. Nanded.
268. Dilip S/o Bhimrao Jadhav
Age : 51 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Bhahegaon Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
269. Savita Raghunath Kadam
Age : 35 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Biloli, Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
270. Anita Raghunath Kadam
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jarul Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
271. Suresh S/o Annarao Dhone
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sanegaon Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad.
272. Ananda S/o Fakirrao Watude
Age : 31 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Audhanghat, Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
273. Sadashiv S/o Neval Navnath
Age : 31 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tembhurni Tq. Vasmat, Dist. Hingoli.
274. Mahadevrao S/o Gangaram Savle
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kakadhaba Tq. Aundhanghat, Dist. Hingoli.
Umesh Malani Page 39 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
275. Raju S/o Gowardhan Pawar
Age : 41 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Suregaon Tq. Audhanghat, Dist. Hingoli
276. Snyanshwar S/o Swaruprao Pawar
Age : 26 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Tadsona Tq. Beed, Dist. Beed.
277. Assaram S/o Namdeo Rathod
Age : 40 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kavadgaon Tq. Vadhvani, Dist. Beed.
278. Rameshwar S/o Namdeo Rathod
Age : 46 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Chikhal Beed Tq. Vadvani, Dist. Beed.
279. Pandit S/o Laxman Savate
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Dongargaon Tq. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded.
280. Kishor S/o Pandurang Pawar
Age : 37 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Lohra (B) Tal. Aundha Nagnath, Dist. Hingoli.
281. Bharat S/o Londha Chavhan
Age : 41 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Shendursena, Tal. Aundha Nagnath, Dist. Hingoli.
282. Subhash S/o Ramchandra Jadhav
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School,
Umesh Malani Page 40 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Jalaldhaba Tal. Aundha Nagnath, Dist. Hingoli.
283. Arun S/o Motiram Pawar
Age : 36 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Lohra (B) Tal. Aundha Nagnath, Dist. Hingoli.
284. Ramdas S/o Ganpat Vaje,
Age : 37 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Yeet Tq. And Dist. Beed.
285. Lahur S/o Sitaram Pawar
Age : 37 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Secondary School,
Tadsona, Tal. & Dist. Beed.
286. Panditrao S/o Gunwant Deshmukh,
Age 32 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Unchgaon (B) Tal. Hadgaon, Dist. Nanded.
287. Gajanan S/o Kisanrao Gavhane,
Age : 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School, Elegaon,
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
288. Prafulla S/o Balwantrao Shinde,
Age : 33 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Shindagi,
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
289. Rahul S/o Namdeorao Pandit,
Age : 41 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad High School,
Akhal Balapur, Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
290. Jagdish S/o Hiraman Chavhan,
Umesh Malani Page 41 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age : 30 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. At Post : Tamthare, Tal. Shindkheda,
Dist. Dhule.
291. Baburao S.o Manukrao Surnar
Age : 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Deulwadi,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.
292. Dattatrya S/o Shivajirao Bhosale,
Age : 35 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Deulwadi,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.
293. Mahendra S/o Prakashrao Ahire
Age : 32 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Tirthpuri,
Tq. Ghansavangi, Dist. Jalna
294. Kailas S/o Mohanrao Kale
Age : 40 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Moykheda Digar, Tq. Jamner,
Dist. Jalgaon.
295. Vikas S/o Nanarao Waychal,
Age : 27 years Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Bhingi,
Tq. Dist. Hingoli.
296. Rajkumar S/o Rajkumar Bhaurao,
Age : 27 years Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Ambala,
Tq. Dist. Hingoli.
297. Gajanan S/o Haribhau Waychal
Age : 42 years Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Pimpri,
Umesh Malani Page 42 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Waychal Tq. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli.
298. Rajendraprasad S/o Bhaurao Jadhav
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Secondary School, Shevala,
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
299. Sandip S/o Bhagwanrao Urewar,
Age : 33 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Akhada,
Balapur, Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
300. Pravin S/o Ramdas Bondhare,
Age : 26 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School Akhada Balapur,
Tq. Kalamnuri, Dist. Hingoli.
301. Apparao S/o Karbhari Rathod,
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Jahagir Moha,
Tq. Darur, Dist. Beed.
302. Bhagwan S/o Shankarrao Deshmukh,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kurunda, Tq. Vasmat, Dist. Hingoli.
303. Rajesh S/o Ramchandra Rathod,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sukuli, Tq. Vasmat Dist. Hingoli,
304. Sudhakar Sitaram Paikrao,
Age : 35 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jawala (B), Tq. Sengaon, Dist. Hingoli.
305. Umesh S/o Basvant Giram
Umesh Malani Page 43 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age ; 41 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Prashaskiya School,
Hipparga, Tq. Lohara Dist. Osmanabad.
306. Bhagwat S/o Babasaheb Kande,
Age : 30 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jahagir Moha, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
307. Eknath S/o Sahebrao Pingle,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Asardoh, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
308. Babu S/o Nanubhau Tikde
Age : 32 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School,
Bhogalwadi, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
309. Chintaman S/o Ramdas Munde
Age : 32 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad High School,
Bhogalwadi, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
310. Mahadev S/o Gopinath Kokate
Age : 33 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jahagir Moha, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
311. Laxman Sudhakar Deshmukh,
Age : 29 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Asardoh, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
312. Mahadev S/o Baburao Akushkar
Age : 33 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Asardoh, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
Umesh Malani Page 44 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
313. Vikas S/o Laxman Deshmukh,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kasba Vibhag, Tq. Dharur, Dist. Beed.
314. Shrikant S/o Ramrao Khadke
Age : 35 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Devdahiphla, Tq.Dharur, Dist. Beed.
315. Virendra Devanand Patil,
Age : 33 years, Occu : Teacher,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School, Chaugaon,
Tq. Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon
316. Rathod S/o Apparao Karbhari
Age : 45 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jahagir Moha, Tq. Darul, Dist. Beed.
317. Bhagwan S/o Shankar Deshmukh
Age : 38 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary / Secondary School,
Kurunda, Tq. Vasmat, Dist. Hingoli.
318. Rajesh S/o Ramcharan Rathod,
Age : 40 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Sukali, Tq. Vasmat, Dist. Hingoli.
319. Murlidhar S/o Pandurang Rathod
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Kendriya Kanya Shala,
Malakoli, Tq. Loha, Dist. Nanded.
320. Jitendra S/o Ashok Patil,
Age : 35 years, Occu : Nil,
Umesh Malani Page 45 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o Shaskiya Madhyamik Ashram Shala,
Sonbardi, Tq. Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon.
321. Shashikala Shaligram Patil,
Age : 37 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Shaskiya Madhyamik Ashram Shala,
Sonbardi, Tq. Erandol, Dist. Jalgaon.
322. Umarao S/o Manikarao Rakhonde
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary Schoo,
Ajalsonda, Tq. Aunda, Dist. Hingoli.
323. Govind S/o Tukaram Kadam,
Age : 25 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad School,
Tapovan, Tq. Aundha, Dist. Hingoli.
324. Datta S/o Trambakrao Dhobale,
Age : 26 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad School,
Gunda, Tq. Basmat, Dist. Hingoli.
325. Narayan S/o Nagnath Sontakke
Age : 39 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School,
Gunda, Tq. Basmat. Dist. Hingoli.
326. Yogesh S/o Raghunath Ovhal
Age : 30 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Upkheda, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
327. Sarjerao S/o Keshav Magar,
Age : 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Upkheda, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
Umesh Malani Page 46 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
328. Kishor S/o Yashwant Kalokhe,
Age : 42 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad School,
Vaghale Tanda, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
329. Sachin S/o Bapurao Patil,
Age : 26 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Vadgaon Lambe, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
330. Valmik S/o Arjun Mali,
Age : 39 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o. Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Pilkhod, Tq. Chalisgaon, Dist. Jalgaon.
331. Gajanan S/o Vasantrao Musale,
Age : 42 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad School,
Hingoli Tq. Hingoli Dist. Hingoli.
332. Sunita Ramkishanrao Darewad,
Age : 43 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Girls School,
Hingoli Tq. Hingoli Dist. Hingoli.
333. Santosh S/o Devidas Patil,
Age : 30 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Thergaon Tq. Paithan Dist. Aurangabad.
334. Samadhan S/o Anand Tapore
Age : 31 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Kanadkheda(B)Tq. Hingoli Dist. Hingoli.
335. Dnyanba S/o. Mahadu Mule
Age : 47 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Bahuvid Prashala,
Umesh Malani Page 47 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Hingoli Tq. Hingoli Dist. Hingoli.
336. Ashish S/o Pandurang Borade,
Age : 38 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Ekalahera, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna.
337. Gangadhar S/o Punjaram Nage,
Age : 38 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Higher Primary School,
Dhamangao, Tq. Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad.
338. Laxman S/o Kundalikrao Jadhav
Age : 43 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o C.P.S. Satefhal
Tq. Basmat, Dist. Hingoli.
339. Dadabhau S/o Somaji Bagul,
Age : 44 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad School,
Parchoda, Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
340. Sachin Mahajan Bedwal,
Age : 28 years, Occu: Nil,
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Jamarwadi, Tq. Vaijapur, Dist. Aurangabad.
341. Dattatray S/o Arjun Bhad
Age: 39 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Dhanore, Tq Yevala, Dist. Nasik
342. Shankar S/o Pandharinath Gore
Age: 43 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Karhi, Tq. Nandgaon, Dist. Nasik
343. Shivaji S/o Rajaram Kakvipure
Age: 30 Years, Occu: Nil
Umesh Malani Page 48 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Nagapur, Tq. Nandgaon, Dist. Nasik
344. Popat S/o Raghunath Kakad
Age: 37 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Lohshingave, Tq. Nandgaon, Dist. Nasik
345. Dnyaneshwar S/o Bhanudas Jagjhap
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla parishad Primary School
Nyaharkheda Khurd, Tq. Yevala, Dist. Nasik
346. Nivrutti S/o Chandrabhan Bhalerao
Age:41 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Gonde, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nashik
347. Vishnu S/o Nivrutti Patole
Age: 49 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Hivare, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
348. Sheetal Bhagwan Aher
Age: 31 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Thondbar, Tq Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
349. Nilufar Mohammad Shaikh
Age: 34 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Hevare, Tq. Sinner, Dist. Nasik
350. Sagar S/o Uttam Pawar
Age: 25 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Konambe, Tq Sinner, Dist. Nasik
Umesh Malani Page 49 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
351. Sanjay S/o Shivram Aavhad
Age:38 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Vadjhire, Tq Sinnar, Dist. Nashik
352. Subhash S/o Vasant Aavhad
Age: 33 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Pimple, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nashik
353. Bharat S/o Nana Thorat
Age: 34 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Mahori, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
354. Anil S/o Ramdas Sonone
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Leha, Tq Bhokardan, Dist. Jalna
355. Ramhari S/o Chandrabhan Bhalerao
Age: 35 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Musalgaon, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
356. Mohan S/o Punja Sirsath
Age: 43 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Musalgao, Tq Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
357. Vandana Shivaji Ugale
Age: 28 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Dalviwadi, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nashik
358. Sampat S/o ramdas Sadgir
Age: 26 Years, Occu: Nil
Umesh Malani Page 50 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Pimple, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
359. Ravindra S/o Shivaji Ugale
Age: 30 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Bhendali No.2, Tq. Nifad, Dist. Nasik
360. Sarika Shivaji Ugale
Age: 26 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Deshwandi, Tq. Sinnar, Dist. Nasik
361. Suresh S/o Shantaram Jadhav
Age: 48 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Municipal Corporation
Gorewadi, , Dist. Nasik
362. Bharat S/o Ramchandra Yadav
Age: 38 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Dahiwadi, Tq. Sinnar, Dist.Nasik
363. Shaikh Chandpasha Rahim
Age: 34 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Mehagaon, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
364. Shaikh Sikandar Rahim
Age: 26 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad High School
Wasadi, Tq. Kannad, Dist. Aurangabad
365. Bhagwan S/o Gopalrao Sansare
Age: 43 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Parner, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna
366. Ganesh S/o Kisanrao Pisule
Age: 40 Years, Occu: Nil
Umesh Malani Page 51 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Bhardi, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna
367. Shaikh Rizwan Hiraji
Age: 46 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Parada, Tq. Ambad, Dist. Jalna
368. Manojkumar S/o Popatrao Sonawane
Age: 46 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Banoti, Tq. Soeagaon, Dist. Aurangabad
369. Amol S/o Vishambhar Chikate
Age: 32 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Kinhi Vadgaon (Kendra), Tq. Soeagaon,
Dist. Aurangabad
370. Gajanan S/o Rangrao Solunke
Age: 46 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Kinhi, Tq. Soeagaon, Dist. Aurangabad
371. Sahebrao S/o Manikrao More
Age: 51 Years, Oecu: Nil
Re: Zilla Parishad Secondary School
Kinhi, Tq. Soeagaon, Dist. Aurangabad
372. Shivaji S/o Shamrao Golekar
Age: 38 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Antarwali Tembhi, To, Ghansawangi, Dist. Jalna
373. Ramesh S/o Dnyanoba Nannaware
Age: 40 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zalla Parishad Secondary School
Antarwali Tembhi, Tq. Ghansawangi, Dist. Jalna
Umesh Malani Page 52 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
374. Dnyaneshwar S/o Vasant Ghuge
Age: 27 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad School
Panewadi, Tq. Nangon, Dist. Nasik
375. Govind Manikrao Budhwant
Age: 42 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Kendriya Primary School
Chikalthana, Tq. Selu, Dist. Parbhani
376. Ashwini Samadhan Dukre
Age: 25 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Danapur, Tq. Bhokardan, Dist, Jalna
377. Vilas Shamrao Tandale
Age: 35 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad (Urdu) School
Ambad, Tq.Ambad, Dist. Jalna
378. Rahul Gangadhar Aaghade
Age: 23 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Dhamangaon, Tq Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad
379. Kailash Anna Salunkhe
Age: 44 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Sherodi(BK), Tq. Phulambri, Dist. Aurangabad
380. Salve Pradeep Panditrao
Age: 28 Years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Kavandgaon, Tq Vadwani (B), Dist. Beed.
381. Sayyad Saddam Sadik
Age: 24 Year, Occu: Nil
R/O :Zilla Parishad Primary School
Umesh Malani Page 53 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Donza, Tq. Paranda, Dist. Osmanabad
382. Kiran Nivrutti Khandare
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Devlali
Tal: Bhoom , Dist: Osmanabad
383. Tosif S/oKhanjakhan Pathan
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Devlali
Tal: Bhoom , Dist: Osmanabad
384. Kailas S/o Baliram Shinde
Age: Major, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Devlali
Tal: Bhoom , Dist: Osmanabad
385. Vishwas S/o Manmat Bokephode
Age: 37 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Paranda
Tal: Bhoom , Dist: Osmanabad
386. Shivshankar Revansidhha patu
Age: 43 yeras, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School, Kesgaon
Tal: Tulzapur, Dist: Osmanabad
387. Shrikrushna S/o Gopal Chavhan
Age: 37 years, Occu:Nil
R/o:Zilla Parishad Primary School, Akluz,
Tal: Malshiras, Dist: Solapur
388. Baban S/o laxmanrao Magar
Age: 44 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla parishad Primary School
389. Sudhakar S/o Ramji Bokhare
Age: 39 Years, Occupation: Nil
Umesh Malani Page 54 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
R/o Chilgavhana, Amboda, Mahagao,
Dist. Yavatmal.
390. Ramkrishna S/o Namdeo Chavhan
Age: 36 Years, Occupation: Nil
R/o Zilla Parishad Primary School,
Amba Pimpari, Tal: Paranda. Dist: Jalgaon.
391. Rajkumar S/o Sadashiv Kambale
Age: 44 Years, Occupation: Nil
R/o Esapur, Tal: Pusad, Dist: Yeotmal.
392. Yashwant S/o Ramrao Suryatal
Age: 37 Years, Occupation: Nil
R/o Ambedkar Nagar, aarni Road
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
393. Vilas S/o Baban Manwar
Age: 37 Years, Occupation: Nil
R/o Ambedkar Nagar, aarni Road
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
394. Sanjay S/o Sattva Kambale
Age: 43 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
395. Santosh S/o Hazari Medran
Age: 32 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
396. Nilesh S/o Dipak Rajulwar
Age: 30 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
397. Nitin Tarachand Aawate
Age: 30 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
Umesh Malani Page 55 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
398. Pooja Dnyaneshwar Shinde
Age: 26 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
399. Shaikh Rashid Shaikh Ashraf
Age: 30 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
400. Shaikh Mastan abdul Gani
Age: 34 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
401. Shoeb khan Gaftar Khan Ansari
Age: 32 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
402. Pratima Vishwanath Johre
Age: 32 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
403. Atul S/o Chandrashekhar Shirdkar
Age: 30 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
404. Bapurao S/o Nivrutti Kambale
Age: 44 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
405. Arif Shaha Razak Shaha
Age: 33 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
406. Pravin S/o Amarsingh rathod
Age: 32 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
407. Santodh Bapurao Rathod
Age: 38 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
Umesh Malani Page 56 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
408. Sanjeevani Ramdas Patil
Age: 38 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
409. Manoj Babulal Rathod
Age: 28 Years, Occupation: Nil
Tal: Digras. Dist: Yeotmal
410. Arvind S/o Laxmanrao Kadam
Age: 46 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
411. Swapnil S/o Shivajirao deshmukh
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
412. Sangita Suryakantappa Kurale
Age: 29 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
413. Awadhoot S/o Marutarao Lahorkar
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
414. Digambar S/o atmaram Khodke
Age: 36 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
415. Bandu S/o Parma Rathod
Age: 43 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
416. Rahul S/o Ramrao Sawant
Umesh Malani Page 57 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
417. Sudhakar S/o Khemaji Tawade
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
418. Mahendra S/o Ghansyamrao Deshmukh
Age: 30 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded
419. Ganjanan S/o Gangaram Dhage
Age: 31 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
420. Vinayak S/o Avdhootra Suryawnshi
Age: 45 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
421. Sudhakar S/o Shivajiappa Hanawate
Age: 42 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
422. Sunda S/o ganeshrao Thadke
Age: 34 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
423. Digambar S/o Vitthalrao Chauthmal
Age: 44 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
Umesh Malani Page 58 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
424. Laxmikant S/o Pralharao Shinde
Age: 28 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
425. Mahendra S/o Prakashrao Aaher
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
426. Sadik Basir Pathan
Age: 27 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
427. Prakash Namdeo Rathod
Age: 26 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
428. Ramdas Bahnudas Rathod
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded.
429. Rajendra Bhagwan Janrao
Age: 32 years, Occu: Nil
R/o: Zilla Parishad Primary School
Tal: Hadgaon, Dist: Nanded. ...PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
(Through its: Principal Secretary,
School Education and Sports Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032)
Umesh Malani Page 59 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
2. The Principal Secretary,
Finance Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032.
3. The Maharashtra Shikshan Parishad
(Government of Maharashtra Undertaking)
Through its Project Director,
Jawahar Bal Bhavan, Netaji Subhash Marg,
Churni Road, Mumbai ...RESPONDENTS
ALONG WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12522 OF 2017
1. Mahesh s/o Dnyandeo Waditake,
Age: 30 years, Occu: Service,
R/o. Galnimb, Tq. Shrirampur,
Dist. Ahmednagar
2. Pravin s/o Sudhakar Najan,
Age: 31 years, Occu: Service,
R/o. Tajnapur, Tq. Shevgaon,
Dist. Ahmednagar ...PETITIONERS
VERSUS
1. The Union of India,
Through its Secretary,
Government of India,
Nariman Bhawan,
New Delhi - 110001
2. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Principal Secretary,
School Education and Sports
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032
3. The Maharashtra Shikshan Prarishad,
Umesh Malani Page 60 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
(Government of Maharashtra Undertaking),
Through its Project Director,
Jawahar Bal Bhavan, Netaji
Subhash Marg, Churni Road,
Mumbai 400 004
4. The Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar,
Through its Chief Executive Officer
(Primary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad
5. The Education Officer (Primary),
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar ...RESPONDENTS
ALONG WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 688 OF 2017
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 11771 OF 2015
Sadik S/o Bashir Pathan,
Age 30 years, Occ : Nil,
R/o At Mahartakali, Post Ardhpimpari,
Tq. Georai, Dist. Beed. ...PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
Principal Secretary,
State of Maharashtra
School Education and Sports Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. Shri. Nand Kumar,
Principal Secretary,
State of Maharashtra,
School Education and Sports Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. ...RESPONDENTS
Umesh Malani Page 61 of 121
::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
***
Ms. P.S. Talekar for petitioner in WP/12238/2017.
Mr. P.R. Kathneshwarkar h/f Mr. A.G. Ambetkar for Petitioner in
WP/12522/2017.
Mr. Deelip Patil Bankar Special Counsel appointed by State.
Adv N.E. Deshmukh and Adv N.B. Patekar for Intervenor.
Mr. S.M. Ganachari, AGP for Respondent - State.
***
CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE &
MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
ORDER CLOSED ON : DECEMBER 12, 2018
ORDER PRONOUNCED ON : OCTOBER 21, 2020.
ORDER (PER PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)
1. Heard learned Counsels appearing for the respective parties.
2. It would not be out of place to state here that in both these petitions an identical/common issue is involved, as such, the petitions are tagged together and accordingly are taken up for hearing and disposal. By consent of the parties Writ Petition No. 12238 of 2017 is taken up as lead petition.
3. Both these petitions raised challenged to the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017, whereby a policy is framed by the State Government to appoint part time instructors. The petitioners have worked either as craft instructors or physical instructors or health instructors in primary school run by Zilla Parishad in the academic year Umesh Malani Page 62 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc 2010-11 and 2012-13 as their services were not continued for the academic year 2013-14. They have approached this Court by filing Writ Petitions No. 7359/2012 and 7106/2013. By way of an interim order, this Court protected the petitioners and petitions were disposed of by judgment and order dated 07.09.2012 and 09.05.2014 respectively. The State Government in earlier round of litigation assured this Court that a fresh policy would be framed considering the past services of the petitioners for the fresh appointments. It was also submitted before this Court that the issue in respect of appointment to these petitioners could also be considered appropriately.
4. Learned Counsel Ms. Pradnya Talekar vehemently submitted that under the guise of a new policy by way of Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 the Respondent - State Government continued its old policy and gave a go by to the directions of this Court. It is also submitted by Ms. Talekar that it was assured before this Court that the State Government could give weightage for the past services while considering the candidature for fresh appointments but the policy is framed in such a way that instead of giving an effect positively to the criteria of due weightage it only adversely affects the petitioners. Before Umesh Malani Page 63 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc we proceed to deal with the submissions of learned Counsel appearing for the parties in detail it would not be out of place to refer the backdrop of the petitions in detail.
5. As stated above, the petitioners who were working either as craft instructor or physical instructor or health instructor in primary school run by the Zilla Parishad in the academic year 2010-11 and 2012- 13 as their services were not continued for the academic year 2013-14. Being aggrieved by the act of discontinuation the petitioners have approached this court by filing Writ Petitions and by way of an interim order this Court directed the respective Municipal Corporation, Zilla Parishad and Municipal Council to allow the petitioners to work as part time instructors and discharge their duties and further directed that those part time instructors who were already relieved, terminated or removed shall be deemed to engage as part time instructors and they should be allowed to discharge their duties in accordance with conditions in appointment letter. This Court disapproved the approach of the State Government to fill up the permanent posts by appointing the candidates on clock hour basis. This Court also disapproved the approach of the Respondents to continue those candidates as part time employee for a Umesh Malani Page 64 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc long period. Thus, this Court was of the opinion that the policy of the Respondent authorities was not in conformity with the provisions of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and as also the provisions of Right to Education Act. This Court even expressed an opinion that the State Government shall formulate its policy for appointment of such candidates on permanent post by creating permanent cadre and also making an provisions so as to instruct the candidates at the time of their appointment that they have to attend other schools so as to make good of the requisite work load. This Court disapproved the approach of the Respondent authorities which was in the nature of short term appointments.
This Court also found that the State Government failed to formulate a proper policy for permanent appointments within three years from 01.04.2010. This Court also considered the aspect of a reasonable and adequate payment to such candidates and expressed a hope that while formulating the final policy document the State Government while considering the aspect of a prescribed pay scale of the part time instructors commensurate that their pay scale shall not be less than half of the pay scale prescribed for full time teachers. This Court expected Umesh Malani Page 65 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc that the State Government would take immediate steps i.e. as well in advance before commencement of the academic year 2014-15. This Court also expected that the State Government would frame the policy keeping in view of the provisions of Right to Education Act, rules and schedules thereunder.
As the State Government failed to comply with the orders of this Court, some of the part time instructors were constrained to file contempt petition. The Respondent State Government made an attempt to seek an extension of time for compliance of the order of this Court but the prayer was rejected by this Court. It was submitted before this Court that the State Government is under process to finalize the policy and it was submitted that the draft policy decision was already approved by the cabinet. It was submitted before this Court that the details about the steps being taken by the State Government could be placed before this Court and on that statement the Writ Petition No. 7661/2013 and Contempt Petition No. 313/2014 were adjourned to 25.09.2014. The Respondent State Government issued Government Resolution dated 21.08.2014 as an attempt only to show this Court that the State has formulated policy for appointment of part time instructors as directed by Umesh Malani Page 66 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc this Court. As the policy dated 21.08.2014 was in breach of directions of this Court as well as in breach of provision of Article 21-A of the Constitution, several part time teachers again approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 9631/2014 and other connected petitions. When the petitions came up before this Court, the State Government through Additional Government Pleader place on record a communication to submit that in view of the judgment of this Court the Respondent - State Government would review its policy and modify the Government Resolution dated 21.08.2014 within a period of three months. By order dated 10.02.2015 this Court was pleased to dispose of the Writ Petition No. 9631/2014 and other connected petitions as well as contempt petition. The State Government again failed to comply its assurance given before this Court thereby giving rise to the aggrieved persons for filing Contempt Petition No. 258/2015. When the Contempt Petition came up before this Court, this Court was unhappy on the breach of the Respondent - State Government and the same is reflected in the order dated 20.07.2015. Then the State Government issued Resolution dated 07.10.2015 to show that the State Government has formulated policy for appointment of part time instructors as directed by this Court. Its policy Umesh Malani Page 67 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc so called framed was also running contrary to the provisions of Right to Education Act as well as the directions issued by this Court in earlier Writ Petition. Petitioners left with no choice again approached this Court by filing Writ Petition No. 11771/15 and other connected petitions challenging Government Resolution dated 07.10.2015.
6. On 07.01.2017, again State Government issued Resolution whereby certain modifications were made in Government Resolution dated 07.10.2015. As Government Resolution dated 07.01.2017 carrying infirmities which was their in earlier Government Resolution dated 07.10.2015, petitioners by seeking permission to amend the petition so as to challenge Government Resolution dated 07.01.2017 in Writ Petition No. 11771/2015. Writ Petition No. 11771/2015 was disposed of vide order dated 06.06.2017. While disposing above Writ petition, this court expected that the State Government to fix a better and honourable honorarium to the part time instructors and the Respondent authorities are duty bound to give due weightage to the part time instructors who have worked earlier. The State Government then issued Resolution on 01.09.2017 and again an attempt is made to state that this policy formulated by the State Government for appointment of part time Umesh Malani Page 68 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc instructors is in consonance with the directions of this Court in Writ Petition No. 11771/2015. The State Government under the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 decided to create 5505 posts on part time instructors in 1835 panels in State of Maharashtra to be filled in purely on temporary basis and on honorarium as against 18645 sanctioned in past. The State Government under the Resolution dated 01.09.2017 prescribed the qualifications and decided to pay honorarium at the rate of Rs. 50 per hour for maximum ceiling of Rs. 5000/- per month. In the selection process of the candidate the State Government constituted a committee for selection of the candidates and prescribed the mode and manner for appointment of the candidates. In the mode of selection of the candidates the State Government decided to grant additional marks ranging from 1 to 8 out of total 100 marks in the written examination depending on the actual days put in service as part time instructors in the past.
7. It is the submission of petitioners that the part time instructors were appointed for 4 to 5 months each time in the span of three months. As a result of these, no candidate had put in more than 365 days total service and the result was of no candidate would be in a Umesh Malani Page 69 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc position to secure three additional marks. In the earlier order of this Court, Court expected that the State Government would give due weightage to the experience of the candidates but the mode prescribed in the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 is not fulfilling the expectation of this Court, on the contrary, the object behind the direction of this Court to give due weightage to the experience i.e. past services of the candidates is frustrated and the honorarium offered to these candidates also against the direction of this Court. When this Court in its earlier order intended to do away the policy of the Respondent State Government to appoint the part time instructors on contract basis and instead prescribed them regular pay scale which shall not be less than half of the pay scale prescribed for the full time teachers as the State Government has decided to pay an honorarium at the rate of Rs. 50 per hour for maximum ceiling of Rs. 5000/- per month. Thus, it is the submission before this Court that the State Government instead of framing a proper and fresh policy in accordance with the directions of this Court only reiterated its earlier policy which was disapproved by this Court.
8. The Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 is placed on Umesh Malani Page 70 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc record at Exhibit 'O'. Ms. Pradnya Talekar vehemently submitted that when this Court directed the State Government to frame the policy so as to create the permanent cadre for the instructors, the State Government framed policy whereby the candidates would be appoint on an honorarium as part time instructors and then there is introduction of the guest instructors. To submit that how the policy under Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 runs contrary to the directions of this Court, learned Counsel Ms. Pradnya Talekar invited attention of this Court to the order of this Court passed in Writ Petition No. 7359/2012, copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit 'A'.
9. Our attention was invited to the submissions made before this Court by learned AGP appearing for the State. We may refer to the statements for ready reference which reads as under:
7. Learned A.G.P. on instructions submits that this move to engage part-time Instructors, primarily was initiated, so that the State Government implements the provisions of the enactment of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 (for short "the Act of 2009"). Under the scheme, 60% share of the expenditure is to be borne by the Central Government Umesh Malani Page 71 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc and 40% by the State Government.
8. Learned A.G.P., on instructions, submits that the State Government is preparing the final policy document in respect of the steps to be taken for recruiting the employees, staff under various categories to effectively implement the mandate of the Act of 2009 and the policy decision is to be taken by the State Government considering the letter and spirit of the Act of 2009.
10. Our attention was also invited to interim order of this Court and it reads thus:
14. In the result, considering the facts of these cases, the material before us, the provisions of the Act of 2009 and the submissions advanced across the bar, we pass the following order:
A) By way of interim order, we direct the Joint Director (Administration) Maharashtra Prathamik Shikshan Parishad, Mumbai to allow all the part-time Instructors appointed under the communication stated above by the respective Municipal Corporations, Zilla Parishad to discharge their duties as such, under the conditions stipulated by respective appointment orders.
B) We direct that the part-time Instructors who Umesh Malani Page 72 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc came to be relieved/terminated/removed as part-time Instructors working under the above-mentioned scheme shall be deemed to have been engaged as part-time Instructors and they shall be allowed to discharge their duties in accordance with the conditions of the appointment letters.
C).....
D).....
11. Then our attention was invited to the order of this Court dated 11.03.2014 to submit that this Court time and again observed that the State Government failed to comply directions of this Court. In the order dated 11.03.2014 the Division Bench was pleased to observe thus:
4. Upon hearing learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and upon perusal of paragraph nos. 14 to 19 of the order in Writ Petition No. 7359 of 2012 and connected writ petitions thereto, prima facie we are of the opinion that, the respondents have not adhered to the directions given by this Court and in particular respondent no. 2 to this petition. In fact, we were of the prima facie opinion to issue show cause notice to the respondents, however, on the insistence of learned A.G.P. Mr. S.S. Tope, appearing for the respondent so as Umesh Malani Page 73 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc to enable him to take instructions from the Chief Secretary, State of Maharashtra and also from respondent nos. 1 and 2, we defer hearing of these petitions. All the petitions to be listed for hearing on 20.03.2014.
12. Then our attention was invited to the judgment and order of this Court in Writ Petition No. 7106/2013, copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit 'C'. It would be relevant for our purposes to refer to certain relevant observations of this Court:
66. We have given careful consideration to the arguments advanced by the counsel for the petitioners, learned Additional Government Pleader for the State and State authorities and Parishad, respective counsel appearing for the respondent Zilla Parishad, and with able assistance of the counsel appearing for the parties, we have carefully perused the pleadings in the petitions, grounds taken therein and the annexures thereof, affidavit in reply filed by the respondent- State and State authorities and also the Zilla Parishad, provisions of Constitution of India, RTE Act and various judgments of the Supreme Court and this Court (cited supra), by the respective counsel. We find that the bunch of these petitions has raised and posed many questions for consideration, since prima facie, upon considering material placed on record, it appears that the State Umesh Malani Page 74 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc Government has not yet formulated the final policy though the provisions of RTE Act stipulates time limit of three years to formulate policy and to take steps, including appointment of part time Instructors in the subjects of Art Education, Health and Physical Education and Work Education, and therefore, first two questions which arise for consideration in these writ petitions are;-
i) Whether the State Government is under obligation to formulate the policy so as to give meaning and effect to the provisions of RTE Act 2009?
ii) Whether the Constitution and also the provisions of the RTE Act mandates that the appropriate Government is under obligation to perform its role under the Constitution and provisions of RTE Act 2009?
67. In this respect, it would be apt to reproduce herein below the statement of Objects and Reasons for bringing and incorporating Article 21-A of the Constitution of India.
Statement of Objects and Reasons.- (1) "The Constitution of India in a Directive Principle contained in Art. 45, has made a provision for free and compulsory Umesh Malani Page 75 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc education for all children upto the age of fourteen years within ten years of promulgation of the Constitution. We would not achieve this goal even after fifty years of adoption of the provision. The task of providing education to all children in this age group gained momentum after National Policy Education (NPE) was announced in 1986. The Government of India, in partnership with the State government has made strenuous efforts to fulfill the mandate and though significant improvements were seen in various educational indicators, the ultimate goal of providing universal and quality education still remains unfulfilled. In order to fulfill this goal, it is felt that an explicit provisions should be made in the part relating to Fundamental Rights of the Constitution.
The Statement of objects and reasons for bringing 83rd amendment Bill 1997 is as under:- (2) With a view to making right to free and compulsory education a fundamental right, the Constitution (83rd amendment) Bill 1997 was introduced in Parliament to insert a new Article, namely Art. 21-A, conferring on all children in the age group of 6 to 14 years to right to free and compulsory education. The said Bill was scrutinized by the Parliamentary Standing Committee on Human Resources Development and the subject was also dealt Umesh Malani Page 76 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc with its 165th Report by the Law Commission of India. (3) After taking into consideration the report of the Law Commission of India and the Recommendation of the Standing Committee of Parliament proposed amendment to Part III, IV and part IV-A of the Constitution are being made which are as follows:-
(a) To provide for free and compulsory education to children in the age group of 6 to 14 years for this purpose, a legislation should be introduced in Parliament after the Constitution (93rd Amendment) Bill 2001 is enacted.
(b) To provide an Article 45 of the Constitution that the State shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education to children below the age of six years; and
(c) To amend Art. 51A of the Constitution with a view to providing that it shall be the obligation on the parents to provide opportunities for education for their children.
(4) The bill seeks to achieve the above objects."
68. The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, 2002 inserted Article 21-A in the Constitution of India to provide free and compulsory education of all children in the age group of six to fourteen years as a Fundamental Right in such a manner as the State may, by Umesh Malani Page 77 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc law, determine. The RTE Act represents the consequential legislation envisaged under Article 21-A, means that every child has a right to full time elementary education of satisfactory and equitable quality in a formal school which satisfies certain essential norms and standards. Article 21-A and the RTE Act came into effect on 1 April 2010. The title of the RTE Act incorporates the words 'free and compulsory'. 'Free education' means that no child, other than a child who has been admitted by his or her parents to a school which is not supported by the appropriate Government, shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education. 'Compulsory education' casts an obligation on the appropriate Government and local authorities to provide and ensure admission, attendance and completion of elementary education by all children in the 6-14 age group. With this, India has moved forward to a rights based framework that casts a legal obligation on the Central and State Governments to implement this fundamental child right as enshrined in the Article 21A of the Constitution, in accordance with the provisions of the RTE Act.
(i) Right of children to free and compulsory education till completion of elementary education in a Umesh Malani Page 78 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc neighbourhood school.
(ii) It clarifies that 'compulsory education' means obligation of the appropriate government to provide free elementary education and ensure compulsory admission, attendance and completion of elementary education to every child in the six to fourteen age group. 'Free' means that no child shall be liable to pay any kind of fee or charges or expenses which may prevent him or her from pursuing and completing elementary education.
(iii) It makes provisions for a non-admitted child to be admitted to an age appropriate class.
(iv) It specifies the duties and responsibilities of appropriate Governments, local authority and parents in providing free and compulsory education, and sharing of financial and other responsibilities between the Central and State Governments.
(v) It lays down the norms and standards relating inter alia to Pupil Teacher Ratios (PTRs), buildings and infrastructure, school-working days, teacher-working hours.
(vi) It provides for rational deployment of teachers by ensuring that the specified pupil teacher ratio is maintained for each school, rather than just as an average for the State or District or Block, thus ensuring that there Umesh Malani Page 79 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc is no urban-rural imbalance in teacher postings. It also provides for prohibition of deployment of teachers for non-educational work, other than decennial census, elections to local authority, State legislatures and Parliament, and disaster relief.
(vii) It provides for appointment of appropriately trained teachers, i.e. teachers with the requisite entry and academic qualifications.
(viii) It prohibits (a) physical punishment and mental harassment; (b) screening procedures for admission of children; (c) capitation fee; (d) private tuition by teachers and (e) running of schools without recognition, (ix) It provides for development of curriculum in consonance with the values enshrined in the Constitution, and which would ensure the all-round development of the child, building on the child's knowledge, potentiality and talent and making the child free of fear, trauma and anxiety through a system of child friendly and child centered learning."
"Article 21-A of the Constitution of India. The State shall provide free and compulsory education to all children of the age of six to fourteen years in such manner as the State may, by law, determine."
87. The provisions of Article 21-A and Article 45 of the Umesh Malani Page 80 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc Constitution of India if read conjointly with the provisions of RTE Act and the expositions of the Supreme Court, referred to herein above, there is no slightest doubt that, the State of Maharashtra is under Constitutional and statutory obligation to implement the provisions of RTE Act. Therefore, in the light of the discussion herein above, we have to observe that, the State Government and in particular the concerned department has failed in its obligation to formulate final policy document and thereby frustrated the mandate of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and the provisions of RTE Act and in particular Sections 19 and 23 and Scheduled thereunder and other provisions of the RTE Act as well. (Emphasis Supplied)
89. As already observed, due to failure of the State Government not to formulate final policy document within three years from the date of commencement of RTE Act, in the academic year 2013-14, though budgetary provision was to be made by the Central Government and also by the State Government, as reflected from the documents placed on record, since no final policy document was prepared by the State Government, the Central Government did not release the funds to the extent of its share of 65%, and as a result, the State government did not appoint the Umesh Malani Page 81 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc petitioners and other candidates for the academic year 2013-14. We are constrained to observe that, it is the sheer failure of the State Government in not formulating the policy document within three years from the date of commencement of RTE Act, the Central Government did not sanction and release 65% of the funds though provision was made by the Central Government and resultantly the petitioners' appointments might be for specified period and clock hour basis, could not be continued for the academic year 2013-14. The petitioners are not at fault on their part, and therefore, they have rightly knocked the doors of this Court by invoking writ jurisdiction for redressal of their grievance.
90. The third question which falls for consideration is;-
iii) Whether the appointment of the petitioners, was as a back door entry or those were made in pursuance to the directions of the State government by local management committee?
The petitioners in their petitions have in clear words stated that, all the petitioners have been appointed by the local managing committee which was directed to make such appointments by the State government, through respondent Parishad by advertising the post and through Umesh Malani Page 82 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc selection process by the local management. The learned Additional Government Pleader argued that, the appointments of the petitioners are not by the competent selection committee and also the procedure is not followed in their appointments, in as much as, their appointments are illegal and not in accordance with law. In this respect it is necessary to refer to the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of Education Department of the State Government.
92. Therefore, upon reading aforementioned paragraphs of the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of the State Government, there is no slightest doubt that the appointment of the petitioners as part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education are through the school management committee on the instructions issued by the State Government through the Parishad. Though the learned Additional Government Pleader during the course of hearing argued that they are not selected through proper selection or they are selected/appointed illegally or there are irregularities in their appointments. However, in view of the statement made in the affidavit in reply, such assertion of the Additional Government pleader during the course of argument is devoid of any merits and such argument deserves to be rejected, as it is Umesh Malani Page 83 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc contrary to the statement made in the affidavit in reply filed by the Officer of the State Government. When the Additional Government Pleader was confronted with a specific query that whether any instances are placed on record so as to show or suggest that, the petitioners are illegally appointed or there are irregularity in their appointments, he could not point out a single specific instance to that effect. Therefore, in our considered view, the State Government cannot take stand that, the appointment of the petitioners is by back door entry or without following proper procedure. Therefore, we are of the considered view that, the petitioners have been selected and appointed for a specific period by the local management on instructions of the State Government through the respondent Parishad.
93. The learned Additional Government Pleader tried to canvass that, the post sanctioned are 8577 of part time instructors by issuing Government Resolution dated 7.12.2011, by the Government of Maharashtra and also additional 10068 posts were sanctioned in the light of strength of students, purely on clock hour basis in the year 2012-13 and the said posts were sanctioned for a particular year. Upon careful perusal of the contents of G.R. dated 7.12.2011 or other documents placed on record, sanctioning additional 10068 posts on clock hour Umesh Malani Page 84 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc and temporary basis, nowhere it is mentioned that those posts are sanctioned for a particular year. Therefore, the argument of the learned Additional Government Pleader that, those posts were sanctioned for that particular year deserves to be rejected and accordingly the same stands rejected.
94. There is another reason why such contention of learned Additional Government Pleader deserves to be rejected, is that in order to give true effect and meaning to Article 21-A of the Constitution of India, so as to provide free and compulsory education to the children between the age group of 6 to 14, and further in order to implement the provisions of RTE Act, the State Government cannot sanction the post on temporary basis for particular academic year and such sanction of the posts has to be on permanent basis and long term measure/plan by the State in conformity with the provisions of RTE Act and schedule therein. Therefore, in the light of the discussion herein above, it has to be concluded that, the petitioners were appointed as part time Instructors for (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical education and (c) Work Education etc. on clock hour basis for particular period, through local management committee as per the directions issued by the State Government through the Parishad. Therefore, Umesh Malani Page 85 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:57 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc we reject the argument of the Additional Government Pleader that, appointments of the petitioners were not proper or regular. We hold that, the appointment of the petitioners were by selection committee i.e. local management, as directed by the State Government through Prathamik Shikshan Parishad and not as a back door entry. Consequently, we hold that the State Government cannot sanction the post as tried to be canvassed by the learned Additional Government Pleader, for a particular year, and it has to be on permanent basis as a long term measure. Therefore, the argument of Additional Government Pleader that, said posts were sanctioned for a particular year, stands rejected.
95. The next and important question which falls for our consideration is, iv) Whether the petitioners can, as a matter of right, ask for regularization of their services?As it is evident from the pleadings and grounds taken in the petition and also the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners that, the petitioners' selection were by proper selection committee, constituted by local management and their appointments were on sanctioned posts and therefore, according to the petitioners their services deserve to be regularized. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners have Umesh Malani Page 86 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc tendered across the bar short affidavit with averments that, the petitioners' services deserve to be regularized contending that the Government of Maharashtra issued Government Resolutions / Orders / Notifications so as to regularize services of employees appointed on ad-hoc basis, in various departments, that too without following the process of selection prescribed under the Recruitment Rules.
104. It is submitted that the Government of Maharashtra has not adopted a uniform policy regulating regularization of services. The Government of Maharashtra has been regularizing services of several employees appointed on ad-hoc basis as an when it considered convenient to do so.
105. Upon considering the affidavit in reply filed by the State authorities, as mentioned herein above, in the light of copies of appointments orders placed on record by the petitioners and the judgment of the Supreme Court and this Court, we will have to hold that no mandatory directions can be issued to the State Government to regularize the services of the petitioners by giving service benefits and permanency. Upon careful perusal of the appointment letters, which were issued to the petitioners, the petitioners were appointed for specified period on Umesh Malani Page 87 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc specific pay and not in regular pay scale and also in some cases on clock hour basis. Therefore, we reject the prayer of the petitioners for regularization of their services and directions to the State Government to regularize their services and grant them benefit of permanency. However, upon careful perusal of the material placed on record by the petitioners, and in particular by way of filing additional affidavit, in the similar facts and circumstances, and in similar set of facts, the State Government has absorbed, regularized and appointed the employees, though earlier they were appointed on clock hour basis or for part time, or for temporary period. Therefore, keeping in view the fact that, all the petitioners have discharged their duties sincerely, for the period stipulated in their appointment orders, for respective years, and the work experience which they have gained, during said period, has to be given due weightage and the petitioners cases are required to be considered on priority basis. Even in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Umadevi (supra) the Supreme Court in para 44 held thus:-
"44. One aspect needs to be clarified. There may be cases where irregular appointments (not illegal appointments) as explained in S. V. Narayanappa (supra), R.N. Nanjundappa (supra) and B.N. Nagarajan (supra), and Umesh Malani Page 88 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc referred to in paragraph 15 above, of duly qualified persons in duly sanctioned vacant posts might have been made and the employees have continued to work for ten years or more but without the intervention of orders of courts or of tribunals. The question of regularization of the services of such employees may have to be considered on merits in the light of the principles settled by this Court in the cases above referred to and in the light of this judgment. In that context, the Union of India, the State Governments and their instrumentalities should take steps to regularize as a one time measure, the services of such irregularly appointed, who have worked for ten years or more in duly sanctioned posts but not under cover of orders of courts or of tribunals and should further ensure that regular recruitments are undertaken to fill those vacant sanctioned posts that require to be filled up, in cases where temporary employees or daily wagers are being now employed. The process must be set in motion within six months from this date. We also clarify that regularization, if any already made, but not subjudice, need not be reopened based on this judgment, but there should be no further by-passing of the constitutional requirement and regularizing or making permanent, those not duly appointed as per the constitutional scheme." (Emphasis supplied).Umesh Malani Page 89 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
106. Therefore, in the light of discussion herein above and in view of observations in para 44 by Supreme Court, in the case of State of Karnataka (supra) it is quite possible for the State of Maharashtra, which is considered to be welfare State, to redress the grievance of the petitioners keeping in view the services rendered by them for three years, and failure of the State Government in not appointing them for 4th year due to not formulating final policy document, and as a consequence not receiving funds from the Central Government, since the State Government failed to take measures/implement the provisions of RTE Act within three years from 1.4.2010 i.e. with effect from coming into force the RTE Act.
107. As already observed, so far the State Government has failed in its obligation/duties to implement the provisions of the RTE Act and not formulated final policy document within three years. As a Welfare State, the State Government keeping in view problems faced by the citizens like the petitioners and also keeping in view "human rights" involved in the matters, the wisdom will prevail over the State Government to take appropriate measures for redressal of grievances of the petitioners by giving considerable weightage to their experience and Umesh Malani Page 90 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc length of service and also by giving priority to them in the appointments, as a long time measure so as to implement the provisions of RTE Act, Rules thereunder and the Schedule prescribed.
13. As stated above, at the cost of repetition, we state here that the State Government prayed for extension of time and the same was rejected by order dated 11th August, 2014, copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit 'D'. Then learned Counsel invited our attention to the judgment and order of this Court passed in Writ Petition 7106/2013 and other connected Petitions. We may refer to the relevant portion of the said order as below:
ORDER The present application seeking modification of judgment and order dated 09th May, 2014 passed in Writ Petition No. 7103 of 2013 with connected writ petition is disposed of as under:
A. the prayer for modification of item Nos. (iv) and
(vi) of para no. 118 of the judgment and order dated 09 th May, 2014 in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 with connected writ petitions is rejected.
B. So far as item no. (v) of para no. 118 of the Umesh Malani Page 91 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc
judgment dated 09.05.2014 is concerned, it is held that, instead of 5th to 7th standards, the same shall be read as 6th to 8th standard and the words "Rule 20 of Rules of 2010" shall stand deleted.
C. Rest of the part of item (v) of para no. 118 of the judgment dated 09.05.2014 shall remain unchanged. D. The civil application accordingly is disposed of.
14. Learned Counsel then invited attention of this Court to the Government Resolution dated 21st August, 2014, copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit 'H' to submit that the State Government giving a total go by to the directions of this Court again adopted the policy of appointment on contractual / clock hour basis. Then there is a reference to weightage to experience by way of allotment of marks. It is submitted by learned Counsel Ms. Talekar that in the Government Resolution dated 21st August, 2014, a reference is made to a screening test of 100 marks and only 10 marks are allotted so as to say due weightage is given to the experienced candidates. Learned Counsel Ms. Talekar submitted that allocating 10 marks for experienced to submit that a due weightage is given to experienced is an irrational act of the Respondent State. It is submitted by learned Counsel Ms. Talekar that Umesh Malani Page 92 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc allocation of 10 marks would be inadequate weightage considering total 100 marks for the screening test. It is then submitted that the State Government in Government Resolution dated 21 st August, 2014 deducted the posts and referred to 5505 posts of part time instructors. Then Ms. Talekar invited our attention to the order of this Court in Contempt Petition and other connected petitions to submit that the challenge was raised to the Government Resolution dated 21 st August, 2014 on the ground that policy is not in consonance with the judgment delivered by this Court. It is submitted that on a statement made by the Government that the State Government is in the process of modifying the policy the order was post referring to the statement of State. Our attention was invited to the order and same reads thus:
8. In light of the above, we pass the following order:
I. .....
II. .....
III. .....
IV. In view of the statement of the Respondent -
State recorded about modifying the said scheme and Umesh Malani Page 93 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc directions given to do the same within three months, the contempt petitions stand disposed of. However, it would be open for the Petitioners to agitate their rights including that of contempt if the State fails to adhere to their statement and directions issued in these petitions.
15. Then our attention was invited to the Government Resolution dated 07th October, 2015 whereby a new policy is framed.
Learned Counsel Ms. Talekar then submitted that by way of the said policy the State Government introduced a new cadre of guest instructors in place of the part time instructors. The requisite conditions and modalities are referred to in the said Government Resolution. Then by way of the corrigendum the State Government made a reference to the honorarium to be paid to guest instructors.
16. Our attention was invited to the judgment and order of this Court dated 06.06.2017 in Writ Petition No. 11771/2015. A reference was made to the scheme of Right to Education Act and rules and it was submitted that the scheme of the RTE Act and Rules prescribe mandatory functions to be performed. If the entire structure of the RTE Act and the Rules framed thereunder is perused, the respondents are required to create a permanent and professional cadre of teachers with Umesh Malani Page 94 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc service regulations and pay scales so as to provide quality education to the students. The statute, more particularly Section 7(5) of the RTE Act bestows the entire responsibility on the State Government. Section 8(d) of the RTE Act states that it is the duty of the appropriate Government to provide the infrastructure including school building, teaching staff and learning equipment. The appropriate government is the State Government. No provision is made in respect of the same in the impugned order.
Then a reference is made to the directions of this Court in Writ Petition No. 11771/2015 with connected writ petitions are as follows:
15. This Court, under its judgment and order dated 09/05/2014 in Writ Petition No.7106 of 2013 with connected Writ Petition, had directed the State Government to formulate a policy in respect of part-time Instructors. The directions issued by this Court in its judgment and order dated 09/05/2014 in Writ Petition No.7106 of 2013 with connected Writ Petition, read as under :-
"....
118. In the light of elaborate/ detailed discussion Umesh Malani Page 95 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc in foregoing paragraphs, this Court has reached to following final conclusions:-
i) It is the failure of the State Government and in particular concerned Education Department, not to formulate final policy document within three years from 1.4.2010 i.e. the date when the RTE Act 2009 came into force.
ii) Since the State Government did not formulate final policy document within three years, as contemplated under RTE Act, and in particular keeping in view provisions of Sections 19 and 23 thereof, funds were not released for the academic year 2013-14 by the Central Government.
Therefore, the petitioners have to file hundreds of petitions for redressal of their grievances. No slightest fault can be attributed to the petitioners.
iii) The State Government while taking final policy decision in respect of appointments is bound to consider the length of services rendered by the respective petitioners working on the post of Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education, mental agony faced by them in not appointing them for the academic year 2013-14 because of Umesh Malani Page 96 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc failure of State Government in not performing its obligation. The State Government while making fresh appointments is bound to give due weightage to the experience gained by the petitioners and their requisite qualifications and mental agony faced by them by not continuing them for the academic year 2013-14, for the failure of the State Government in not formulating permanent policy document.
iv) The State Government keeping in view the
provisions of Article 21-A of the
Constitution of India and the provisions of RTE Act, Rules thereunder and the Schedule prescribed, will have to take decision to create permanent infrastructure and also appointments on permanent basis as a long time measures so as to perform its Constitutional and statutory obligations under the provisions of Constitution of India and RTE Act.
v) The State Government can certainly keep in view and consider to create permanent cadre of part time Instructors in (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education as specified in Section 9 of RTE Act and Rule 20 of Rules 2010, in all Zilla Parishad Umesh Malani Page 97 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc Schools having 5th to 7th standards and minimum strength of 100 students in the State of Maharashtra. Since the State Government has not formulated final policy document, we leave it to the State Government to perform its obligation in view of the provisions of RTE Act.
vi) As already observed, it would be open for the State Government while appointing the candidates on the posts of part time Instructors in
(a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education, or on any other post under RTE Act, the State Government has to inform them that due to inadequate work load in particular schools, they will have to attend other school so as to complete the work hours/work load. The State Government can very well keep in view the policy formulated by the State of Karala or any other welfare State, as a guiding factor. (Emphasis supplied) Vii) The posts sanctioned by the State Government, as reflected in affidavit in reply filed by the State authorities and in the light of the Government Resolution placed on record cannot be considered for the particular academic year. Therefore, the State has to make Umesh Malani Page 98 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc appointments on these sanctioned posts keeping in view long term plan.
119. In the light of discussion herein before, and the conclusion reached, we direct the State Government to take immediate steps/decision, as expeditiously as possible, however well in advance before commencement of next academic year 2014-15, in all respects, in the light of para 118 of this Judgment, keeping in view the provisions of the RTE Act, Rules and Schedule thereunder. "
20. The Schedule specifically lays down that for 6 th to 8th classes, where admissions of students is above 100, there shall be a full-time Head Teacher and Part-time Instructor for (a) Arts Education, (b) Health and Physical Education, and (c) Work Education. The schools are under obligation to maintain the norms and standards as prescribed in the Schedule. The said Schedule has to be scrupulously adhered to. Any deviation therefrom is not permissible. In the impugned Government Resolution, the State Government has termed the part-time Instructor as Guest Instructor. Though nomenclature may not be much relevant, still the respondent though has termed them as Guest Instructors, they are, in fact, part-time Instructors as laid down in the Schedule of the Umesh Malani Page 99 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc RTE Act. They will have to be treated as part-time Instructors.
22. This Court in its judgment and order dated 09/05/2014 in Writ Petition No.7106 of 2013 with connected Writ Petitions, had certainly not granted permanency to the petitioners therein, but had only directed to create permanent cadre. Even as per Rule 4 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010, the school development plan has to be prepared. The said plan shall be a three year plan comprising three annual sub-plans. The said school development plan is required to contain details of (a) class wise enrollment for each year, (b) requirement of the number of additional teachers including head teachers, special teachers and part time instructors separately with reference to the norms specified in the schedule. It shall also contain the physical requirement of additional infrastructure and equipments calculated with reference to norms and standards specified in the schedule. The said plan shall also contain details about financial requirements in respect of additional teachers, part time instructors, so also physical requirement of additional infrastructure and equipments. The school development plan has to be for three years. Under the Government Resolution, the panel of physical instructors Umesh Malani Page 100 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc is for a period of three years and subject to the evaluation of their performance to be continued further for three years. In fact, these part time instructors are required to be continued as long as their work is found to be satisfactory. The permanent cadre is being created.
24. The strength of the students, no doubt, would be fluctuating and the part-time Instructors, as per the Schedule to the RTE Act, are required to be appointed only if the strength of the students from 6th to 8th classes is at least 100 students. The post of part time instructor would be fluctuating according to the number of students. Under the impugned Government Resolution, the permanent cadre is created. It is also stated that the part-time Instructors who have worked earlier would be given first preference. They are required to give weightage to the part-time Instructors who have worked earlier. Clause (iii) of Para 118 of the judgment and order dated 09.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 mandates the State to give weightage to the earlier service rendered by part time instructors. The respondents are duty bound to give weightage to those part-time Instructors who have worked earlier. Clause (Kh)(1) of the Government Resolution dated 07/10/2015 lays down that those part-time Instructors, who have worked earlier, will be given preference for Umesh Malani Page 101 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc inclusion in the panel. Weightage will have to be given to them in appointing them as part-time Instructors. In fact, those who have worked are required to be continued if their work was found satisfactory on evaluation of their work.
25. In fact, the Government ought to have come forward with definite policy about weightage depending upon length of service rendered by part time instructors.
The Government shall lay down guidelines in that regard.
26. The Government had not framed any policy regarding appointment of part time instructors. The part time instructors had to approach this Court as they were not continued. This Court eventually under the judgment and order dated 09.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 with connected writ petitions gave directions to the State to formulate policy governing part time instructors. Pursuant to the judgment and order in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 and other matters, the Government framed the policy vide Government Resolution dated 21.08.2014. The said Government Resolution was withdrawn and fresh guidelines are laid down under impugned G. R. dated 07.10.2015 and 07.01.2017. These Govt. Resolutions have to be in Umesh Malani Page 102 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc consonance with the judgment and order dated 09.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013, as the judgment dated 09.05.2014 in W. P. No. 7106 of 2013 and order in civil application for modification bearing C. A. No. 9191 of 2014 has become final.
17. Then learned Counsel Ms. Talekar by inviting our attention to the latest policy of the State Government reflected in Government Resolution dated 01st September, 2017, copy of the same is placed on record at Exhibit 'O' submitted that Government without their being any rational, deducted posts to 5505. It was was submitted that in the earlier round of proceedings it was submitted before this Court by Government that there are 18645 posts and the Government in the new Resolution deducted number of posts 18645 to 5505. Then it is submitted by Ms. Talekar that Government Resolution refers to appointment on contractual or clock hour basis with on an honorarium. Thus, the submission of learned Counsel Ms. Talekar is thus, conditions are contrary to the decision of this Court. It was submitted by Ms. Talekar that the State Government again raises a ground to appoint the candidates on an honorarium basis an plea of financial constrains of the State. It was submitted by Ms. Talekar that this issue was already referred Umesh Malani Page 103 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc to in the earlier judgment of this Court and it was submitted before this Court that the ratio and financial contribution between the Central and State Government shall be 65:35 respectively. Ms. Talekar invited our attention to the provisions of RTE Act and more particularly Section 7(2)(3)(5). Ms. Talekar then vehemently submitted that Clause 2.3 of the Government Resolution in reference to the appointments of candidates on clock hour basis is again contrary to the scheme of the act and order of this Court. Ms. Talekar submitted that time and again it was expressed the opinion that the State Government shall grant permanency to these candidates and disapproved act of continuing candidates as a temporary employee, for years together the State Government is appointing the candidates on clock hour basis.
Ms. Talekar then invited our attention to clause 2.7 and 2.8 submitted that these clauses are also contrary to the provisions of Act and they are framed in a way so as to treat the candidates as temporary candidates. Then the third challenge raised by Ms. Talekar is in respect of emoluments / honorarium.
As stated above, in clause 4 of the Government Resolution, the emoluments is referred to as an honorarium at the rate of Rs. 50 per Umesh Malani Page 104 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc hour and maximum ceiling at Rs. 5,000/- per month or 100 periods. Thus, the ceiling is provided on the honorarium. Ms. Talekar submitted that the fixation of such honorarium also contrary to the act and the judgment of this Court. Ms. Talekar then submitted that while referring to the due weightage to the experience the State Government allocated the marks whereby hardly any candidate could satisfy the criteria and would be entitled for the additional marks. It is the submission of Ms. Talekar that most of the petitioners would be age barred and as such, are unable to fulfill the criteria in allocation of the marks and thus, instead of giving due weightage to the experience the State Government by this policy is keeping out the candidates who are experienced. Hence, Ms. Talekar on these submissions, prayed for allowing the petition.
18. Mr. Kathneshwarkar appearing for the petitioner in Writ Petition No. 12522/2017, though adopted the submissions of Ms. Talekar, added that the Government resolutions fails to comply the directions of this Court. It is the submission of Mr Kathneshwarkar that this Court in its earlier orders observed that the State Government would frame the policy so as to grant permanency to those candidates who were working for a long period as a temporary employee. It is the submission Umesh Malani Page 105 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc of Mr. Kathneshwarkar that instead of providing security to petitioners who were working for a long period as temporary employees, the State Government is putting further limitations by appointing these petitioners on clock hour basis. It is also submitted by Mr. Kathneshwarkar that in allocation of marks it was expected to give due weightage and complying the directions of this Court in letter and spirit. The allocation of marks is made on the basis of its knowledge instead of considering the criteria of experience. It is also the submission of Mr. Kathneshwarkar that the State Government failed to frame any rules and there is no prescription of qualifications and the policy is ambiguous in that respect. Thus, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners prayed for allowing the petitions.
19. Learned Counsel Mr. Bankar appearing for the Respondent - State opposes the petitions. Our attention was invited to the affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the Respondent No. 1 State through Additional Chief Secretary, School Education, School Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. Learned Counsel Mr. Bankar vehemently submitted that though, the petitioners have challenged the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017, the prayers and more particularly prayer clause 'C' is Umesh Malani Page 106 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc aimed at seeking appointments of petitioners only and further prohibiting the State Government to appoint the other eligible candidates. It was then submitted by learned Counsel Mr. Bankar that while Writ Petition No. 928/2014 and other connected petitions were heard and it was submitted before this Court that the State is yet to finalize the policy and as there was round of litigation and orders were passed by this Court the State Government formulated the policy and modified the same. Mr. Bankar then submitted that this Court in earlier order on May 09, 2014 while deciding the Writ Petition No. 7106/2013 with other connected petitions in clear and unambiguous words rejected the prayer of petitioners for regularization of their services and prayer for direction to the State Government to regularize the service and grant benefit of permanency to the petitioners. Thus, it is submitted by Mr. Bankar that once the issue of granting regularization to the petitioners is closed by rejection order of this Court the petitioners ought not to have made the similar prayer in these petitions. Learned Counsel Mr Bankar then invited our attention to the said order of the Division bench and submitted that this Court left it to the discretion of the State Government to formulate final policy document which reads thus: Umesh Malani Page 107 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc 5] In terms of the orders, which are passed in earlier writ petitions, which are disposed of, but finding that no appointments have been made in the current academic session, we have passed the above order. Since the petitioners are awaiting employment and deployment at the primary school and the State is yet to finalize its policy and seeks time to do so that we are of the opinion that the rights during the intervening period or any breaks or disruption in service, are all matters, which should be looked into the individual teachers and the management inter-se. They would also be dependent upon the policy framed by the State. Therefore, without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties, but only to enable the children to avail of all the opportunities guaranteed by the Act and to have teachers of competence and quality, that we have passed this order.
20. Thus, it is the submission of Mr. Bankar that the State Government is considering the issue by various angles such as, requirement of the instructors qua the principal of schools, financial constrains of the State Government and also considering the provisions of RTE Act, formulated the policy. Mr. Bankar then invited our attention to Section 19 of the Act of 2009 and the scheduled wherein reference is Umesh Malani Page 108 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc made to number of teachers. It is submitted by Mr. Bankar that the petitioners are erroneously submitting before this Court that the requirement of a one teacher for 100 students. It is submitted by Mr. Bankar that clause 3 refers to the school wherein the admission of children is for 100, though the insistence of the petitioners for appointment of a teacher per 100 students is not acceptable.
Then Mr. Bankar submitted that when it was revealed that certain school are not providing complete information, the State Government thought it fit to have a transparent method for a data base i.e. a system developed under the caption 'UDISE' United District Information System for Education. Mr. Bankar submitted that in the opening part of the Government Resolution dated 07.10.2015 itself a reference is made to UDISE and as per the data collected the State Government thought it fit to create 5505 posts of part time instructors and appoint them on contractual basis. It is then submitted by the learned Counsel that the petitioners are harping upon the number of 18645 and this is a number provided by the petitioners and there was no basis and any data collected by the petitioners and as such, State Government has developed the system UDISE and on collection of data Umesh Malani Page 109 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc the State Government though it fit to create 5505 posts and to fill these posts accordingly. Mr. Bankar learned Counsel also invited attention of this Court to the object and intention of the State Government to creation of the posts of guest instructions. It is then submitted by Mr. Bankar that Act of 2009 is aimed at a comprehensive and continuous education of the children and the State Government thought it fit to make provisions of guest instructor and take care of children who have shown their inclination in various subjects apart from the traditional subjects.
Mr. Bankar then referred to the modalities and conditions for selection of candidates in support of his submission. Learned Counsel Mr. Bankar made an attempt to submit before this Court that it was the only submission of petitioners before this Court for creation of permanent cadre and Mr. Bankar reiterated the submission that prayer for regularization was rejected by this Court. It is also submitted by Mr. Bankar that in earlier order of this Court dated 06.06.2017, this Court permitted the Respondent State to appoint guest instructors. Mr. Bankar then submitted that Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 refers to various criteria, age prescription and are also referred to in clause 2.2 and Umesh Malani Page 110 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc 2.5 reference to the procedure for selection of eligible candidates and selection process includes written test and there is a complete transparency in the selection process.
21. Learned Counsel Mr. Bankar submitted that due weightage is also given to the experienced candidates and the candidates can produce material of their past experience as part time instructor and accordingly the marks would be allotted. Thus, the submission of Mr. Bankar is the petitioners are permitted to compete with other candidates and their experience would be given a due weightage in the process of assessment and screening of the candidates. It is then submitted by Mr. Bankar that part time instructors cannot be equated with full time teachers considering the work load. It is submitted by Mr. Bankar that the teacher is expected to conduct 12 periods per week whereas, such is not a stipulation for part time instructors. It is submitted by Mr. Bankar that part time instructors can at the most placed with the guest faculty. It is then submitted by Mr. Bankar that work planned sanctioned by the Central Government in which allocation of budgetary provisions per part time instructor is 50,000/- per year i.e. approximately 5,000 per month and the State has decided to grant entire 5000 as honorarium to the part Umesh Malani Page 111 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc time teachers. Mr. Bankar then submitted that honorarium fixed by the State Government in view of the directions of this Court and in consonance with the budgetary allocation of the Central Government and the work planned prepared by the State under the scheme Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan as such, no fault can be found with the policy of the State Government.
It is also submitted by Mr. Bankar that an option is kept open for those candidates selected as part time instructor to work on more than one school. Mr. Bankar then submitted that for payment of honorarium the Government Resolution makes it clear that the honorarium fixed is considering the prevailing situation. Then it is submitted by Mr. Bankar that the issue of honorarium to be paid is kept open and the issue of payment of honorarium to the part time instructors will have to be considered on the backdrop of the financial constrains of the State Government. Mr. Bankar placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the matter of State of Karnataka Vs. Umadevi. Hence, learned Counsel Mr. Bankar prayed for petitions be dismissed.
22. As we have referred to submissions advanced by learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties in detail, it may not be Umesh Malani Page 112 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc necessary for us to repeat those submission. It is also not necessary for us to refer to earlier orders of this Court as the same are also referred in detail in earlier part of this order.
23. We can safely state that a challenge raised in the petitions to the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 are of four counts that 1) The State Government failed to create a permanent cadre of the part time instructors in spite of directions of this Court. 2) Respondent - State is offering an honorarium to the part time instructors instead of making provision for the salary. 3) While selection of the candidates for the post of part time instructors the experience of the candidates ought to have been considered in an appropriate manner i.e. by giving due weightage as directed by this Court and the policy of the State Government in respect of weightage is unreasonable. 4) Deduction of posts.
24. As referred to above, it was submitted on behalf of the Respondent - State through Mr. Bankar that there was no direction of this Court for creation of permanent cadre and it was only the submission of the petitioners, we are unable to accept this submission of learned Counsel Mr. Bankar for Respondent - State. Umesh Malani Page 113 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 :::
CWP.12238.2017+.doc
25. In the earlier proceedings and more particularly in the order of this Court dated 06.06.2017 this Court observed thus:
22. This Court in its judgment and order dated 09/05/2014 in Writ Petition No.7106 of 2013 with connected Writ Petitions, had certainly not granted permanency to the petitioners therein, but had only directed to create permanent cadre. Even as per Rule 4 of the Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Rules, 2010, the school development plan has to be prepared. The said plan shall be a three year plan comprising three annual sub-plans. The said school development plan is required to contain details of (a) class wise enrollment for each year, (b) requirement of the number of additional teachers including head teachers, special teachers and part time instructors separately with reference to the norms specified in the schedule. It shall also contain the physical requirement of additional infrastructure and equipments calculated with reference to norms and standards specified in the schedule. The said plan shall also contain details about financial requirements in respect of additional teachers, part time instructors, so also physical requirement of additional infrastructure and equipments. The school development plan has to be for three years. Under the Umesh Malani Page 114 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc Government Resolution, the panel of physical instructors is for a period of three years and subject to the evaluation of their performance to be continued further for three years. In fact, these part time instructors are required to be continued as long as their work is found to be satisfactory. The permanent cadre is being created. (Emphasis supplied)
26. It was again observed that:
24. The strength of the students, no doubt, would be fluctuating and the part-time Instructors, as per the Schedule to the RTE Act, are required to be appointed only if the strength of the students from 6th to 8th classes is at least 100 students. The post of part time instructor would be fluctuating according to the number of students. Under the impugned Government Resolution, the permanent cadre is created. It is also stated that the part-time Instructors who have worked earlier would be given first preference. They are required to give weightage to the part-time Instructors who have worked earlier. Clause (iii) of Para 118 of the judgment and order dated 09.05.2014 in Writ Petition No. 7106 of 2013 mandates the State to give weightage to the earlier service rendered by part time instructors. The respondents are duty bound to give weightage to those part-time Instructors who have worked earlier. Clause Umesh Malani Page 115 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc (Kh)(1) of the Government Resolution dated 07/10/2015 lays down that those part-time Instructors, who have worked earlier, will be given preference for inclusion in the panel. Weightage will have to be given to them in appointing them as part-time Instructors. In fact, those who have worked are required to be continued if their work was found satisfactory on evaluation of their work.
27. Thus, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners were justified in making submission before this Court that the Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 is not in consonance with the provisions of the Act as well as orders of this Court. Similarly, while allowing the Writ Petition the Division Bench in its detailed order dated May 09, 2014 was pleased to observe thus:
118. .....
i) .....
ii) .....
iii) .....
iv) The State Government keeping in view the
provisions of Article 21-A of the Constitution of India and the provisions of RTE Act, Rules thereunder and the Schedule prescribed, will have to take decision to create permanent infrastructure and also appointments Umesh Malani Page 116 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc on permanent basis as a long time measures so as to perform its Constitutional and statutory obligations under the provisions of Constitution of India and RTE Act.
28. In so far as challenge to honorarium fixed by the State Government is concerned again we may refer to the observations of the division bench of this Court which reads thus:
111. .....
When the Central Government is releasing 65% funds per year and the State Government has to contribute only 35% funds, the State Government cannot proceed with a sole intention to absorb surplus teachers in school and frustrate the provisions of the RTE Act, wherein the requisite qualification is prescribed in the appointment of part time Instructors (a) Art Education, (b) Health and Physical Education and (c) Work Education.
29. Though Mr. Bankar submitted that as per the work plan submitted under Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan and in view of the allocation of the funds as well as the sharing of burden as 65:35, the State Government has fixed the honorarium at Rs. 50 per hour and Rs. 5,000/- per month. Mr. Bankar learned Counsel appearing for the State Umesh Malani Page 117 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc submits that the Division bench left this issue open for consideration and decision of the State Government as the Division bench has referred to the consolidated pay paid to such employees by Government of Kerala i.e. Rs. 14,000 and when this Court in its earlier order intended to do away the policy of the Respondent State Government to appoint the part time instructors on contract basis and instead prescribed them regular pay scale which shall not be less than half of the pay scale prescribed for the full time teachers and it is expected by the State Government to fix respectable honorarium and by any standard honorarium fixed by Rs. 5000 per month with ceiling of Rs. 50,000/- is not at all adequate figure to treat as an respectable honorarium.
30. Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners was justified in making submission that there should be proper allocation of marks on the basis of experience of the candidates. Though, it was submitted by learned Counsel Mr. Bankar that the petitioners can compete with other candidates and submit the material about their experience for assessment but the pattern adopted in the Government Resolution under challenge is not indicative of due weightage consideration. The State Government ought to evolve a better criteria for consideration on the experience of Umesh Malani Page 118 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc the candidates. We are also unable to accept the submission of Mr. Bankar that the petitioners cannot claim honorarium equated their posts with teachers and at the most the petitioners are at par with the guest instructors. Introduction of the post of guest instructors is also considered by this Court. In the order of this Court, this Court was pleased to observe that State Government can appoint the guest instructor on his willingness and he would render his services voluntarily. Now considering this very fact, we are unable to accept the submission of Mr. Bankar that the post of part time instructor can be equated with the post of guest instructor and accordingly, honorarium is to be paid to the candidates.
31. In so far as the challenge to the deduction in post is concerned, we are unable to accept the submissions of learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners. Mr. Bankar learned Counsel appearing for the State was justified in making the submission before this Court that in earlier round the number of posts to the extent of 18645 was submitted by the petitioners and there was no supporting material to accept this figure. Mr. Bankar was also justified in making submission before this Court that as certain schools failed to provide the proper information in Umesh Malani Page 119 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc respect of number of students, as the State Government has developed UDISE system and accordingly, a data base is created and in view of this data base the figure 5505 is arrived at.
32. Considering the above referred facts, we are of the opinion that the petitions needs to be allowed partly. Accordingly, Writ Petitions are partly allowed. Government Resolution dated 01.09.2017 is hereby quashed and set aside except part to the reference to 5505 posts.
We direct the State Government to form a fresh policy in respect of creation of the permanent cadre for the post of part time instructors and emolument to be paid to the part time instructors within a reasonable period and not more than 8 months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. We further direct that the State Government while framing the policy to consider the issue of giving due weightage to the experience of the candidate.
33. We find merit in the submission of learned Counsel Mr. Bankar that in respect of prayer clause 'C' of the petition. Mr. Bankar was justified in making statement before this Court that on earlier occasion also this Court in clear words rejected the prayer of permanency and as such, the prayer clause 'c' cannot be granted. As such prayer clause 'C' Umesh Malani Page 120 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 ::: CWP.12238.2017+.doc rejected.
34. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petitions, nothing survives in the pending Civil Applications, if any, and accordingly Civil Applications stands disposed of.
35. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petitions, no need to pass separate order in Contempt Petition No. 688/2017. Hence, Contempt Petition is disposed of accordingly.
(MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.) Umesh Malani Page 121 of 121 ::: Uploaded on - 21/10/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 22/10/2020 06:22:58 :::