Mr. Sarjerao Ramchandra Jadhav And ORS v. Mrs. Shobha Mukund Kamlakar And ORS
27 wp 2374.2020.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2374 of 2020 Mr. Sarjerao Ramchandra Jadhav, President Teachers' Heritage Organizing and Coordinating Association, Solapur and ors.
.....Petitioners versus Mrs. Shobha Mukund Kamlakar, Head-Mistress, S. M. Joshi Hindi Medium School, Pune and ors.
.....Respondents Mr. Ashok B. Tajane, advocate for the petitioners. Mr. V. M. Mali, AGP for respondent Nos.2, 3, 5 and 6. CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, JJ.
DATE : 9th MARCH, 2020.
P. C. :
1.
According to the petitioners, respondent No.1- Mrs.Shobha Mukund Kamlakar, got an appointment as an Assistant Teacher in the school on 2nd November, 1998, as a candidate belonging to Scheduled Caste category, and merely because she is married to SC candidate, she would not be entitled to appointment to reserved vacancy. According to the petitioners, respondent No.1 does not belong to SC category. 2.
We fail to understand the locus of the petitioners to challenge the appointment of respondent No.1. Petitioner No.1 claims to be the President of Teachers' Heritage Organizing and Coordinating Association. Petitioner Digitally signed by Shubhada S. Kadam Date:
2020.03.11 10:30:42 +0530 Shubhada S. Kadam Shubhada S Kadam 1/2
27 wp 2374.2020.doc Nos.2 and 3 are the teachers working in the same school where respondent No.1 is working. We put a specific question to learned counsel for the petitioner to point out to us as to how the appointment of respondent No.1 came in the way of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3. According to learned counsel for the petitioner, the approval to the appointment of petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 is pending. We do not find locus of the petitioner to challenge the appointment of respondent No.1. In view of this, the question of looking into the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Valsamma Paul (Mrs) and Cochin University and ors. (1996) 3 SCC 545 does not at all arise. If the petitioners are aggrieved by non-grant of approval to their appointment, it is open for them to challenge such action in accordance with law. The writ petition is dismissed on the ground of locus of the petitioners. [PRITHVIRAJ K. CHAVAN, J.] [R. K. DESHPANDE, J.] Shubhada S Kadam 2/2