JAGDISH UTTAM VASAVE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. The Rule is made returnable forthwith. Learned AGP and the learned advocate Mr. Brahme for the respondent Management waive service in all the petitions. At the joint request of the parties, the matters are heard simultaneously and being disposed of by this common judgment to avoid repetition.

(2.) This is a group of petitions whereby various teachers and a junior clerk appointed by the respondent Nos.4 and 5 Education Society are challenging the similar orders passed by the respondent No.2 Deputy Director of Education (D.D.E.) cancelling the approval granted by the respondent No.3 Education Officer (E.O.) on similar grounds.

(3.) Learned advocate Mr. Panpatte would submit that the petitioners were appointed by following due process of law as laid down under the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 (herein after referred to as the Act and the Rules). A public advertisement was issued on 17/2/2012 pursuant to which the petitioners applied for the posts of teacher except the petitioner in Writ Petition No.2788/2019 who had applied for the post of Junior Clerk. After the due process they were appointed in the same year but on different dates. The E.O. granted approval to their appointment on 29/12/2012. Their names were included in online portal through which the salaries are disbursed.