SANJAY KHEMRAJ RATHOD Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition challenges part of order dated 19 th September, 2011 passed by the Appellate Authority appointed under the provisions of Ashram School Code. The facts leading to this litigation, in short, can be stated as under:

(2.) The Petitioner Sanjay was appointed as an assistant teacher in 1998 in a school by name Kai. Sau. Vatsalabai Pote Ashram Shala, Bardari, Taluka and District Ahmednagar, which is run by a public trust. This is a Government aided school. On 30 th May, 2003, the Petitioner was appointed on probation on the post of Headmaster for a period of one year. Respondent No.2, who is competent Authority for granting of approval for such appointment, granted approval vide order dated 30 th April, 2004. The Petitioner even after April 2004, continued on the said post though no specific order appointing him as Headmaster for period subsequent to April 2004 was passed. The Management of the school, however, by resolution dated 1 st April, 2007 decided to appoint the Petitioner on the post of Headmaster with effect from 1 st May, 2004. Thus, they decided to appoint him permanently as Headmaster and sent a proposal for approval to Respondent No.2. Respondent No.2, however, refused to grant such approval and passed a one line order. The Petitioner challenged this order under Section 3.35 of the Code before the Divisional Social Welfare Officer, Nasik Division, Nasik. After hearing the submissions of all the parties, the Divisional Officer allowed the Petitioner's appeal partly and directed Respondent No.2 to accord sanction for Petitioner's appointment as Headmaster with effect from 9 th May, 2011. Being aggrieved, the Petitioner came to this Court by filing this writ petition. He says that, he deserved to get approval from 1 st May, 2004.

(3.) Respondent No.2 apposed the petition by filing reply. In this reply, he defended the order. But, made no reference to any reason as to why the Petitioner cannot be given approval from 1 st May, 2004 and why approval granted from 9 th May, 2011 was correct. In paragraph No.7 of the affidavit, he stated as under: