MAHATMA PHULE MAGASVARGIYA Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

(2.) It appears that, during pendency of this Petition, respondent no. 3 passed the order on 18th November, 2017 [ExhibitR1 Page61]. The counsel for the petitioners sought leave to amend the Petition so as to take exception to the said order.

(3.) Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, petitioner nos. 2 to 5 are appointed after following proper procedure laid down under Section 5 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools [Conditions of Service] Regulation Act, 1977 [for short 'Act of 1977']. Petitioner no. 1 submitted an application through Headmaster of the School and sought permission of respondent no. 4 to fill up the vacant posts by issuing public advertisement. However, there was no response / reply from the office of the Education Officer, and therefore, in order to avoid further delay in appointments of teachers so as to avoid loss to the students due to the nonavailability of the teachers, petitioner no. 1 issued advertisement and after inviting applications and proper selection, petitioner nos. 2 to 5 have been appointed. It is submitted that, petitioner nos. 3 to 5 are appointed from VJA and D category. The appointment of petitioner nos. 3 to 5 from the aforesaid reserved categories is made pursuant to the direction by the State Government to clear backlog of the appointments of the candidates from the reserved category.