JUDGMENT - ASHOK A. DESAI, J.:---Petitioners in both these petitions are Assistant Teachers in the Private Secondary School. They have invoked our jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution for a relief of writ of mandamus directing the Management to make the payment of their salary as per the pay-scale prescribed by the Government. 2.Mr. pursananiand Mr. Palshikar the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents-Management resisted the claim initially on the ground that the petitions are not maintainable as the writ could not be issued against a Private Management. Precise submission of the learned Counsel is that there is no public function involved. Even otherwise, the function is not of statutory character. The Management is neither a State nor an instrumentality of the State and as such the petition is untenable. 3.The submission is erroneous. Having regard to the various provisions under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 and the Rules of 1981 framed thereunder, the Management of the Private School owes several responsibilities and obligations. For enforcing those statutory obligations writ could be issued against the Private Management. 4.Undisputedly, the respondents-Schools are squarely covered by definition of Clause (24) of section 2 of the Act. Sub-section (1) of section 3 of the Act unequivocally provides that the provisions under the Act shall apply to Private Schools in the State of Maharashtra, whether receiving any grant-in-aid or not. It makes explicit that the statutory obligation is to be carried by School irrespective of the fact whether they receive grant-in-aid or not. Furthermore, Clause-7 of the Rules of 1981 provides that the scale of pay for full time as well as part time teachers shall be as specified in Schedule-C. This makes it further explicit that the Private Managements of the School irrespective of the fact of receiving grant or not, are under statutory obligation to pay salary to the teachers as per the pay-scale enumerated in Schedule-C. Since the statutory duty as envisaged by the Rules and the Act is to be complied with by the Management, for enforcing or implementing the same the writ of this Court under Article 226 can be issued. 5.One of the submissions of Mr. Palshikar is that the State Government is a necessary party. In the absence of the State the petition has become bad for non-joinder. We heard Mr. Palshikar at length. 5.One of the submissions of Mr. Palshikar is that the State Government is a necessary party. In the absence of the State the petition has become bad for non-joinder. We heard Mr. Palshikar at length. However, we are not satisfied as to how the petition becomes bad for want of State as a party. The learned Counsel tried to urge that providing grant is basically the responsibility of the State and, therefore, State is a necessary party. In the present case both the schools are unaided. Even otherwise on this aspect they cannot shift their responsibility of payment to their teachers. Moreover, because the schools are unaided, the responsibility to make payment cannot be saddled on the State as such, it being a statutory obligation as observed earlier to be discharged by the respondents-Management and, therefore, the State is not a necessary party. 6.Before us, the learned Counsel for the respondents, Mr. Palshikar and Mr. Pursnani would not dispute that their teachers have not been paid salary as per the scale prescribed by the Government or the teachers of the privately managed school. They are under obligation to pay according to scale. One of the limbs of submission at this stage was that there are financial difficulties and constraints. Financially Management is not viable. However, this could not be either a legitimate ground or a ground of propriety to deny the teacher a right which has been statutorily recognized. We have been informed that similar is the view taken by this Court in Writ Petition No. 2363 of 1987 dated 14th February 1995. 7.In view of this we direct the respondents-Management to pay to the teachers of their schools salary as prescribed for them by the Government which is included in Annexure "C" to the rule. Director of Education and concerned Education Officer shall take the responsibility, to workout the arrears and payment thereof and shall take necessary steps for disbursing the said arrears to the teachers from the respondents-Management. Rule made absolute accordingly. The entire process shall be completed by the Management and the Education Department expeditiously, preferably within a period of six months Petitions allowed.