MANSOOR AHMED MOHD. HASHIM Vs. CHAIRMAN/GEN. SECRETARY, YATEEM KHANA & MADRASA, ANJUMAN KHAIRUL ISLAM & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent rule made returnable forthwith. Heard parties.

(2.) The Petitioner is presently working as a junior clerk in AKIs High School (Girls), Chiragnagar, Ghatkopar, Mumbai. The first respondent is the Chairman of the Trust known as Yateem Khana & Madrasa Anjuman Khairul Islam. The said trust is running the said AKIs High School which is recognised and aided private school within the meaning of Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulations Act, 1977 and the Rules made thereunder (for short MEPS Act and MEPS Rules). The second respondent is the Headmistress of the said school. The third and fourth respondents are Deputy Director of Education for Greater Mumbai and Zonal Educational Inspector (NZ) respectively,

(3.) By this petition the petitioner seeks to challenge the rejection of approval vide letters dated 20th Aug., 2001 and 21st Oct., 2001 and also the letters of 4th respondent dated 15th Feb., 2003/25th Feb., 2003. The admitted facts of the case are that the petitioner is fully qualified to hold the post of Junior Clerk having qualification of B.Com. The petitioner was initially appointed as Junior Clerk with effect from 1997. Initially petitioners appointment was shown as temporary and thereafter his appointment has been continued as the probationer with effect from 4th Jan., 2000. The authorities had accorded approval for appointment of petitioner for the period from 15th Dec., 1997 to 14th Dec., 1998 vide approval letter dated 12th March, 1999. Thereafter, vide letter 24-4-2000 the 4th respondent granted approval of petitioners appointment for the period 1999 to 2000. However, by his letter dated 28th Aug., 2001, the 4th respondent declined to grant approval to the continuation of petitioner in the said post, inter alia, on the ground that as per the G.R. dated 1st March, 2000 and the G.R. dated 29th June, 2000 there is ban on recruitment of the non-teaching employees and, therefore, the proposal for approval cannot be accepted. The management forwarded proposal of the petitioner for reconsideration but the same was again rejected by 4th respondent holding that his decision communicated vide letter dated 20th Aug., 2001 cannot be changed. The propriety and legality of the said communications is impugned in the present petition.