Marathi Mission, Ahilyanagar & Anr. vs The State Of Maharashtra & Anr.

PRONOUNCED ON : 23.09.2026 FINAL ORDER ( PER ABASAHED D. SHINDE J.) :-

Since, common question of law and fact is involved in both these Writ Petitions, they are being decided by this common order.

In both these Writ Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have put forth the following main prayers :-

It is the case of the petitioners that Petitioner No.1 is a Public Trust registered under the Maharashtra Public Trust Act, 1950 and Societies Registration Act, 1860. Petitioner No.1 is running Petitioner No.2, Secondary Schools namely, Clara Bruce High School for Girls and Ahmednagar Boy’s High School (hereinafter referred to as “the Girls’ High School” and “the Boys’ High School” respectively.), since the pre-independence era.

It is further case of the petitioners that, due to reduction in the strength of students, the number of sanctioned posts in both the schools are being reduced every year. In the Academic Year 2017-2018, there were in all seven (07) sanctioned teaching posts in both the schools, however, those have been reduced to zero (00) under the staff approval sanctioned for the Academic Year 2025-2026. As a result of which, the entire staff including teaching and non teaching posts are rendered surplus and they are directed to be absorbed in other schools. The petitioners, therefore, have approached this Court.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that, no doubt, the strength of students in both the schools have been reduced to a great extent; however, that does not mean that, the same is reduced to zero (00). He submits that as per the staff approval granted for the Academic Year 2025-2026, the total number of students in both the schools are 33 each. However, Respondent No.2 while granting staff approval for the academic year 2025-2026 has reduced the sanctioned teaching strength to zero (00) and abolished all the sanctioned teaching posts in both the schools. Consequently, the entire staff including teaching and non teaching posts is rendered surplus.

Learned Counsel for the petitioners, placing reliance on Government Resolution dated 15.03.2024 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Government Resolution”) and Section 25 of the Right of Education Act, 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “the RTE Act”) submits that having regard to the prescribed pupil-teacher ratio, as against 20 students 1 teacher is permissible. He, therefore, submits that the decision of Respondent No.2 thereby declaring the employees of both the Schools, run by Petitioner No.1, as surplus by directing them to be absorbed in other Schools is liable to be quashed and set aside being contrary to the provisions of the RTE Act as well as the said Government Resolution.

Learned AGP, on the other hand at the outset, raised preliminary objection about the maintainability of the Writ Petitions. She submitted that, by virtue of appointment of Administrators by the State Government on the Petitioner No.1-Trust, consequent upon which, the entire day-to-day administration, including services-related and staffing matters of both the schools, vests exclusively in the Administrator, the petitioners have no locus-standi to file the present writ petitions.

Learned AGP further submitted that the petitioners are misinterpreting the provisions of Section 25 of the RTE Act as well as the said Government Resolution. Insofar as Girls’ High School is concerned, the record depicts that the strength of students in 5^th Standard is 6, in the 6^th to 8^th standard the same is 11 and in 9^th and 10^th standard the strength of students is 16. Similarly, in the Boys’ High School, the strength of students in the 5^th Standard is 5, in the 6^th to 8^th standard the same is 14 and in the in 9^th and 10^th the strength of students is 14.

Learned AGP would submit that, in view of said enrollment figures and upon strict compliance of norms prescribed under the said Government Resolution, no teaching staff whatsoever came to be sanctioned for both the High Schools, resultantly, the total sanctioned teaching strength has been reduced to NIL. She submitted that Respondent No.2, therefore, has rightly sanctioned the staffing pattern for the Academic Year 2025-2026 by showing the sanctioned teaching strength as NIL. She, therefore, urged that the Writ Petitions are devoid of any substance and the same deserve to be dismissed.

So far as maintainability of the Writ Petitions at the behest of the petitioners, is concerned, we find substance in the submissions advanced by learned AGP, as can be seen that, the State Government has appointed Administrator on Petitioner No.1-Trust, initially on 04.11.2010, and the said appointment has been continued from time to time till date. In view of the fact that the day today administration of the Petitioner No.1-Trust is being managed by the Administrator, the petitioners have no locus-standi to file the present Writ Petitions and agitate the grievances touching the internal administration, staffing pattern or absorption of surplus staff of Petitioner No.1-Trust. The record depicts that even the Headmasters who have filed these Writ Petitions are declared surplus and are directed to be absorbed in other schools. Therefore, the writ petitions at the behest of Petitioner No.1-Trust and the Headmasters are not maintainable since they have no locus-standi to file them.

As far as merit part is concerned, it is sought to be contended by learned counsel for the petitioners that as the strength of students in both the schools is 33 respectively, at least one teacher is permissible. We find that the said submission is devoid of any substance since, bare perusal of relevant provisions of the said Government Resolution contemplates that it is not the total strength of school, but each class should have minimum strength of 20 students, so as to have one teacher. For better appreciation the relevant provision of the said Government Resolution is reproduced herein below :

Considering the aforesaid provisions of the Government Resolution, it is a matter of record that in none of the classes of either of the schools the strength of students is 20. On the contrary, following chart would show the strength of students in each class of the said schools for the Academic Year 2025-2026.

WP No.5880/2026 : Strength of petitioner No.2 School.

WP No. 5903/2026 : Strength of petitioner No.2 School.

We therefore are of the considered view that having regard to the strength of the students, the strength of teachers shown in the staffing pattern for the Academic year 2025-2026 as NIL in both the schools cannot be faulted with.

In the light of above, we find that both the writ petitions sans merit and the same deserves to be dismissed.

In the result, both the Writ Petitions are dismissed.

(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( N. B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )

At this stage, learned Advocate for the Petitioners seeks continuation of the interim relief granted to the petitioners. For the reasons stated in this order and as we have held that the petitioners have no locus-standi to file the present petitions, the said prayer is rejected.

(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( N. B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )