Asifa Khanam Gula Ahmed Khan vs State of Maharashtra

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By consent, heard both the sides for final disposal.

The petitions are filed by minority institutions to challenge the decisions given by Education Officer on the applications submitted for approval of the newly appointed teaching staff and nonteaching staff. Writ Petition Nos. 8218, 8220 and 8221 of 2016 pertain to teaching staff and Writ Petition No. 8219 of 2016 pertains to nonteaching staff. The proposals for approval are rejected by the Education Officer by giving reason that no certificates were obtained in respect of absence of surplus staff.

The learned counsel for petitioners places reliance on the Government Resolution dated 13.7.2016 of the Education Department of the Government in which it is made clear that in respect of such recruitment, Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Act'' for short) will not be applicable, both against the institution and also for the benefit of the institution. There is also one case decided by the Division Bench of this Court bearing Writ Petition No. 1049/2012 [The Canossa Society and Anr. v. The Commissioner, Social Welfare, Directorate, Government of Maharashtra and Ors.] dated 17.1.2014. Similar point was before the Division Bench of this Court for consideration and this Court held that in view of the decisions given by the Apex Court in various cases involving minority institutions, the Government cannot compel the minority institutions to accept the staff found surplus in other institutions. In view of this decision given by Division Bench of this Court cited supra and aforesaid Government Resolution of the Government, this Court holds that interference is warranted in the orders made by the Education Officer.

In the result, the petitions are allowed. The orders made by the Education Officer in all the matters which were communicated to the petitioners by the letter dated 13.6.2016 are hereby set aside. The matters are remanded back for fresh consideration. Education Officer (Secondary) is expected to keep in mind the aforesaid Government Resolution and the observations made by this Court in W.P. No. 1049/2012 cited supra.

Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms.