Bombay High Court
Nilesh Bapurao Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 30 January, 2020
Equivalent citations: AIRONLINE 2020 BOM 2933
Author: S.V. Gangapurwala
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala, Shrikant D. Kulkarni
1 937-WP-2022-2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 2022 OF 2020
Nilesh S/o. Bapurao Patil,
Age : 31 years, Occu: Service (Peon),
R/o: Secondary Ashram School,
Ranaiche, Tal. Amalner, Dist. Jalgaon ...Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through, Principal Secretary,
Director of V.J.N.T.O.B.C and
Special Backward Class &
Social Welfare Department
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.32.
2. Director of V.J.N.T. O.B.C. and
Special Backward Class & Social
Welfare Department
Maharashtra State, Pune.
3. Regional Dy. Commissioner
Social Welfare Department,
Nashik, Region Nashik.
4. Asstt. Commissioner,
Social Welfare Department,
Jalgaon. ...Respondents
Mr P.B. Patil, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr P.S. Patil, Addl. G.P. for Respondents-State
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA
AND
SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 30TH JANUARY, 2020
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)
1. Heard.
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2020 22:02:37 :::
2 937-WP-2022-2020
2. Rule. Rule made returnable and heard forthwith with the consent of the parties. The petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.
3. The petitioner is the employee of aided private Ashram Schools. The petitioner is claiming his entitlement to higher pay scale under Assured Career Progress Scheme (for short `the ACPS") on completion of 12 years of qualifying service from the date of their initial appointment.
4. It is the contention of the petitioner that the employees serving in private aided Ashram Schools are discriminated and have been denied benefits whereas, the benefits are made available to the Ashram Schools conducted by the Social Welfare Department and other private aided schools conducted by other Departments.
5. The issue raised in this petition is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Division Bench at Principal Seat in Writ Petition No. 2358/2013 and other companion matters, decided on 21 st September 2013. The Division Bench in paragraph Nos. 17 to 19 of the order has observed thus :-
"17. The Assured Career Progress Scheme is a welfare scheme which is basically brought about ::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2020 22:02:37 ::: 3 937-WP-2022-2020 to remove stagnation as very few promotion avenues are available to Group `C" and `D"
employees. The ACPS enables the eligible employees to be placed in higher pay scale. The eligible non-teaching staf of the aided Secondary Schools in Group `C' and `D' category gets the benefit of ACPS. But the similar category of employees in the aided private Ashram Schools who perform identical duties have been denied the benefit of ACPS which infringes their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The action of denial of benefits to the similarly placed employees discharging similar duties is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.
18. Only on the basis of purported ground of financial crunch, we fail to understand the approach of the State Government of discriminating between the non-teaching staf of aided Ashram Schools and non-teaching staf of aided private Schools. At one stage both the Schools were functioning under the control of only one department.
19. In our view the denial of benefit of ACPS amounts to discrimination, which is hit by the rights guaranteed by Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India."
::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2020 22:02:37 :::
4 937-WP-2022-2020
6. In view of the decision rendered by the Division Bench, as referred to above, the petition deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.
7. The respondents are directed to examine the cases of each of the individual petitioner for deciding whether they satisfy the criteria laid down for claiming benefits under the ACPS to the private aided Government schools under the Government Resolution dated 30 th April 1998, as modified from time to time, and if it is found that the petitioner is entitled to claim benefits under the Scheme and he satisfies the eligibility criteria, the respondents shall extend the benefits to the petitioner. The respondents shall scrutinize the case of the petitioner within a period of six months and extend the benefits to such of the petitioner who is found eligible, as expeditiously as possible preferably, within a period of four months from such scrutiny.
8. Rule made absolute in above terms. The writ petition stands disposed of accordingly. [ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] mta ::: Uploaded on - 04/02/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 21/03/2020 22:02:37 :::