KUNTA NARAYAN JAGDALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is by a school teacher, who initially worked in a secondary school, thereafter left the service of that school for a period of about 4 years, completed her Ph. D. in the meanwhile, then joined a junior college of the same institution and subsequently retired as a lecturer in the senior college of the same institution. In this process, there was a break in service for a period of 4 years and 24 days between 9th June, 1969 and 2nd july, 1973. In case that break is condoned by passing appropriate order, the petitioner will be eligible to receive better retirement benefits. It is for this purpose that the present petition has been filed.

(2.) AS stated above, the petitioner initially worked as a Head Mistress in a school known as "jaihind Vidyalaya" in District Osmanabad from 4th June 1956 to 8th June, 1969. Thereafter she left the service and proceeded to improve her qualification by enrolling herself for Ph. D. The fact remains that she did receive her General Provident Fund at the time of leaving the secondary school. Thereafter she joined back again on 3rd July, 1973 in a Junior college of the same institute at Barshi. She worked over there from 3rd July, 1973 to 30th June, 1975 and subsequently worked as a lecturer in a Senior college from 1st July 1975 to 30th June, 1994 when she retired. At that time, the Deputy Director of Education made a recommendation on her representation. On that representation dated 19th August, 1991, the Deputy Director recommended that the break in service be condoned as a special case and accordingly orders be passed. The Desk Officer, Government of Maharashtra, however, by his communication dated 11th February, 1992 conveyed the decision to the petitioner that the break could not be condoned. The petitioner relies upon a case of another employee, i. e. one Mr. S. M. Zapake, in whose case a break of some 6 years was condoned and, therefore, Mr. Kudle submits that in the present case also appropriate orders should be passed.

(3.) A reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent State Government and it is pointed out that the two cases of Mr. Zapake and the petitioner could not be compared. The reason given is that Mr. Zapake all throughout taught in a secondary school and subsequently in a Junior College. We do not find any merit in this submission for the reason that Junior Colleges are also treated as an extension of the secondary school and in many places, XI and xii standards are run by the schools themselves. That apart, reliance is placed on a Government Resolution dated 12th November, 1976. This resolution states that breaks after 30th September, 1974 in respect of teachers should not be condoned. Mrs. Bhende, A. G. P. for respondents Nos. 1 and, 2 has however taken instructions from the concerned Section Officers Mrs. Ghodpade from the Higher and Technical Education Department, who is present in Court. Mrs. Bhende informs that it is the School Education Department which can take the decision as to whether this break should be condoned while accepting that since this is a case of break prior to 30th September, 1974, it is possible to condone the break.