SANT BHAGWAN BABA SHIKSHAN MANDAL & ORS. versus GUNWANT & ORS.

Citation: [2024] 5 S.C.R. 523 · Decided: 03-04-2024 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: HIMA KOHLI, AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

[2024] 5 S.C.R. 523 : 2024 INSC 405
Sant Bhagwan Baba Shikshan Mandal & Ors. 
v. 
Gunwant & Ors.
(Civil Appeal No. 2225 of 2011)
03 April 2024
[Hima Kohli and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ.]
Issue for Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in allowing the writ petition 
filed by the respondent no.1 and appointing him to the post of 
Shikshan Sevak in the appellant no.3-school.
Headnotes
Service Law – Appointment – Shikshan Sevak – Respondent 
no.1 was appointed as a peon in the appellant no.3-school 
– According to respondent no.1, he acquired requisite 
qualifications for the post of Shikshan Sevak and he had 
submitted several representations for the said post, but the 
same were not considered favourably – Appellant no.1 issued 
advertisement inviting application for appointment to the post 
of Shikshan Sevak – Respondent no.1 did not apply, instead 
after the post was filled by the appellants, respondent no.1 
filed writ petition before the High Court – The writ petition was 
decided in favour of respondent no.1 – Correctness:
Held: Once the respondent no.1 had acquired the requisite 
qualification in the course of his service with the respondent no. 
3-School, and the relevant GR which was ultimately incorporated 
in the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions 
of Service) Act, 1977, permitted appointment of a non-teaching 
employee in a school as a Shikshan Sevak subject to the 
employee acquiring the requisite educational qualifications and 
further, subject to such a post being available, the appellants 
cannot be heard to state that the respondent no.1 being a part 
of the non-teaching staff, was not entitled for being considered 
for appointment to the subject post – In fact, the language used 
in the regulation dated 10.06.2005, itself makes it clear that 
the employee was not required to take any steps by making a 
representation for being appointed to the post of a Shikshan 
Sevak and an obligation was cast on the appellants to ensure 
524
[2024] 5 S.C.R.
Digital Supreme Court Reports
that on a permanent vacancy being available to the post of 
Shikshan Sevak, a member of the non-teaching staff, who would 
have acquired the educational qualification required for such a 
post, ought to be appointed directly – Therefore, the impugned 
judgment is well reasoned and does not require any interference. 
[Paras 11 and 12]
List of Acts
Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) 
Act, 1977.
List of Keywords
Service Law; Appointment; Shikshan Sevak; Requisite qualifications; 
Non-teaching employee; Entitlement to appointment; Balancing 
equities; Senority; Retiral benefits.
Case Arising From
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 2225 of 2011
From the Judgment and Order dated 17.11.2009 of the High Court of 
Bombay, bench at Aurangabad in WP No. 1895 of 2007
Appearances for Parties
Adarsh Kumar Pandey, Shivaji M. Jadhav, Vignesh Singh, Ms. Apurva, 
Brij Kishor Sah, Prafulla, Alok Kumar, Advs. for the Appellants.
Vivek C. Solshe, Varun V. Solshe, Anjani Kumar Jha, Sachin Patil, 
Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande, Bharat Bagla, 
Sourav Singh, Geo Joseph, Durgesh Gupta, Risvi Muhammed, Aditya 
Krishna, Advs. for the Respondents.
Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court
Order
1.	
The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 17th November, 
2009, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad 
Bench, whereunder a Writ Petition1 filed by the respondent no.1 
praying inter alia for being appointed to the post of Shikshan Sevak 
in the appellant no.3-School was allowed and the appellants were 
1	
Writ Petition No. 1895 of 2007
[2024] 5 S.C.R. 
525
Sant Bhagwan Baba Shikshan Mandal & Ors. v. Gunwant & Ors.
directed to ensure that he is appointed to the subject post on or 
before 31st December, 2009, in accordance with law.
2.	
We may briefly advert to the relevant sequence of events. The 
respondent no.1 was appointed as a Peon in the appellant no.3-
School, being run by the appellant no.1-Society on 14th June, 1991. 
His appointment to the subject post was approved vide letter dated 
29th January, 1998. While working on the subject post, in the year 
2004, the respondent no.1 passed Bachelor of Arts examination 
from the Yashwant Rao Chavan Open University, Nasik. In the year 
2005, he passed the Bachelor of Physical Education Examination. 
On 10th June, 2005, the respondent no.2-State of Maharashtra 
issued a Government Resolution2 for imp

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.