(1.) Rule. There is an Affidavit in Reply from Mr Sunil Sawant Deputy Education Inspector, Mumbai. Rule returnable forthwith.
(2.) Mr Bandiwadekar has also amended the Petition. The first challenge in the Petition is to the refusal by the 2nd Respondent, the Deputy Director of Education, Mumbai Region to permit the entry of the Petitioner's name in the Shalartha Pranali and to allot him a Shalartha ID for the post of a peon in the 5th Respondent aided school. Amended prayer (b1) seeks that an order dtd. 26/10/2018 issued by the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Palghar be quashed and set aside.
(3.) The facts are these. The Petitioner belongs to the Hindu Varli Tribe, a Scheduled Tribe. He has passed his SSC. His caste claim has been validated by the relevant caste scrutiny committee. About this, there is no controversy. The 4th Respondent is an Educational Charitable Trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trusts Act 1950, as also under the Societies Registration Act 1860. It runs one school, viz., the 5th Respondent school. This has classes from Standard I to Standard VII sanctioned on a fully aided basis. Consequently, the service conditions of teaching and non-teaching employees are governed by the provisions of the Maharashtra Employees of Private School (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act 1977 and the applicable MEPS Rules 1981. Typically, posts are sanctioned inter alia on the basis of the student strength of an aided educational institution. It is on that basis that, in accordance with Rule 115(3)(b) of the Mumbai Primary Education Rules, one post each of a junior clerk and a peon were admissible for sanction and approval to the 5th Respondent school. The 1st Respondent, the State issued a GR on 1/4/2011. One post each of peon and junior clerk were sanctioned. That GR covered other schools in various other districts in Maharashtra. On the posts being sanctioned, the school's management was entitled to fill up those posts by following the prescribed selection process.