RAGINI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties heard finally.

(2.) Petitioner is soliciting direction to the respondent - Management to submit the proposal for permanent approval and the respondent No.2 Education Officer to decide it within six weeks. She also seeks direction to pay due salary since her initial appointment.

(3.) Petitioner claims to have been appointed on unaided post in the respondent No.4 School by order dtd. 8/6/2013, on probation. Her appointment was granted approval vide order dtd. 6/12/2014 on probation for a period from 28/6/2013 to 27/6/2015. It is the grievance of the petitioner that though she was rendering services, the respondent Management failed to forward proposal seeking permanent approval and also failed to pay salary. It is further contended that Government started providing grants to the School. She was harassed by the office bearers of the Management and threatened to be terminated. She submitted representation on 11/4/2016 requesting for unpaid salary and forwarding of proposal.