The Bombay High Court has directed the State of Maharashtra to regularise the services of six teachers who had been working in Government Ashram Schools for more than a decade on daily-wage, clock-hour or honorarium arrangements.
A Division Bench comprising Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe delivered the judgment on September 3, 2026, in Writ Petition No. 6262 of 2026. The Court also ordered financial benefits and reinstatement in applicable cases.
Background of the Case
The petitioners Namdeo Tukaram Dhonnar, Machindranath Dadu Katware, Bhaskar Rama Pardhi, Govind Dagdu Karbhal, Somnath Nanasaheb Phapale and Vasant Himmat Khairnar were serving as primary or secondary teachers in Government Ashram Schools.
According to the judgment, they had rendered between 10 and 13 years of service. The petitioners said they were repeatedly issued fresh appointment orders for academic years, resulting in breaks in their service and continued temporary status despite their long tenure.
Their regularisation claims had earlier been considered in proceedings before the High Court. In particular, the petitioners relied on the Court's 2018 decision in Madhukar Bhavanrao Sadgir v. State of Maharashtra, which dealt with long-serving teaching and non-teaching staff in Government Ashram Schools.
Why the State Rejected the Claims
The authorities rejected the regularisation requests through orders dated January 13 and 14, 2026.
Among the reasons cited were alleged absence of an interview at the time of appointment, non-compliance with the prescribed procedure and, in one case, the absence of the TAIT qualification. The State also argued before the High Court that the petitioners had an alternative remedy before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal and that their appointments could not be regularised contrary to recruitment rules.
Court's Observation
The High Court found that the reasons relied upon by the authorities were not sufficient to deny regularisation. It noted that the petitioners had been interviewed before selection and that the absence of a public advertisement had already been considered in earlier litigation involving similarly placed Ashram School employees.
The Bench relied substantially on the principles laid down in Madhukar Bhavanrao Sadgir, particularly concerning employees who had completed 10 years of continuous service while working in sanctioned posts and performing necessary functions in remote tribal areas.
The Court observed:
"Considering the aforesaid settled position in law, we are of the firm view that present petition deserves to succeed."
The Bench also rejected the State's argument concerning the absence of advertisements, noting that the same circumstance had already been considered in Madhukar Bhavanrao Sadgir.
Decision
The Court quashed and set aside the January 13 and 14, 2026 orders issued by the Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Thane Region.
It directed the respondents to regularise the services of the petitioners who had completed 10 years of service, with effect from the date they completed 10 years or the date of filing of the present writ petition, whichever was later.
Those terminated after completing 10 years during the pendency of the petition were directed to be reinstated. The Court also directed payment of financial benefits from the date of completing 10 years of service or the date of filing the earlier writ petition, whichever was earlier.
The directions were to be complied with within three weeks.
Case Details
Case Title: Namdeo Tukaram Dhonnar and Others v. The State of Maharashtra and Others
Case Number: Writ Petition No. 6262 of 2026
Judge: Justice G. S. Kulkarni and Justice Aarti Sathe
Decision Date: September 3, 2026
