Jalandhar Thalu Kamble v. State Of Maharashtra Through Dept. Of Education And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3503 OF 2021 Jalandhar Thalu Kamble ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

...

Respondents .........

Mr. Chetan G. Patil for the Petitioner.

Mr. N.C. Walimbe, A.G.P. for the State-Respondent Nos.1 and 2. .........

CORAM

: R.D. DHANUKA & R.I. CHAGLA, JJ.

DATE : 2nd AUGUST, 2021.

P.C. :- Leave to amend is granted to the Petitioner for deleting Respondent Nos.3 and 4. Amendment to be carried out within one week from today.

Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The learned A.G.P. waives service for the Respondents.

Heard finally by consent of parties.

By this Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioner seeking direction against Respondent No.2 - the Education Officer for granting approval to the appointment of the 1 / 3

Petitioner as Peon w.e.f. 01.09.2007 and for paying salary to the Petitioner with all consequential benefits.

The Petitioner was appointed on non-teaching post in the Adarsh High School. The Petitioner belongs to S.C. category and the Petitioner was appointed as Peon in the said school w.e.f. 01.09.2007. Thereafter on 06.09.2007 the Management and said School approached Respondent No.2 seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner to the post of Peon. The Petitioner has, thereafter, sent reminders of the said proposal on 17.01.2015 and 16.09.2019 (Exhibits E and F at pages 16 and 17 of the Petition). The said proposal of the Petitioner inspite of the reminders has not been considered by Respondent No.2. The Petitioner being aggrieved has filed this Petition.

The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner states that the said proposal for seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner to the post of Peon with Respondent No.3 -School dated 06.09.2007 has till date not been considered by Respondent No.2Education Officer. He submits that inspite of reminders to consider the said proposal issued on 17.01.2015 and 16.09.2019 sent to Respondent No.2, Respondent No.2 has not considered the said 2 / 3

proposal. He has submitted that appropriate directions be issued by this Court to the Respondent No.2 for considering the said proposal of the Petitioner.

Having considered the submission and noting the facts that the Respondent No.2 has not considered the proposal for approval to the appointment of the Petitioner as Peon on regular basis since 06.09.2007, the following order is passed :

i) Respondent No.2 is directed to consider the proposal of the Petitioner dated 06.09.2007 within a period of six weeks from today.

ii) Respondent No.2 shall communicate the decision taken on the proposal of the Petitioner within two weeks from the date of decision.

Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms.

Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. ( R.I. CHAGLA, J. ) ( R.D. DHANUKA, J. ) 3 / 3