Nayana Ramakant Badgujar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others
2025:BHC-AUG:5439-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1344 OF 2025 JAYESH RAVINDRA PATIL
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION & SPORTS DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI - 32.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, SECONDARY & HIGHER SECONDARY, MAHARASHTRA STATE PUNE, CENTRAL BUILDING, DR. ANNIE-BESANT ROAD, PUNE - 411001
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, NASHIK REGION, NASHIK ROAD, NASHIK - 422214.
4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY), ZILLA PARISHAD, JALGAON - 425001.
5. RAJARAM DHONDU SECONDARY SCHOOL, THROUGH IT'S HEAD MASTER, KURHE (PANACHE) TAL. JALGAON, DIST. JALGAON ...
WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1332 OF 2025 NAYANA RAMAKANT BADGUJAR
VERSUS
1. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, SCHOOL EDUCATION & SPORTS DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA, MUMBAI - 32.
2. THE DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, SECONDARY & HIGHER SECONDARY, MAHARASHTRA STATE PUNE, CENTRAL BUILDING, DR. ANNIE-BESANT ROAD, PUNE - 411001
3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, NASHIK REGION, NASHIK ROAD, NASHIK - 422214.
4. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY), ZILLA PARISHAD, JALGAON - 425001.
5. RAJARAM DHONDU SECONDARY SCHOOL, THROUGH IT'S HEAD MASTER, KURHE (PANACHE) TAL. JALGAON, DIST. JALGAON ...
Advocate for the Petitioner in both WP : Mr. R. I.Wakade AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in both WP : Mr. R. K. Ingole Advocate for Respondent No. 5 in both WP : Mr. D. A. Karnik ...
1/3
CORAM
:
MANGESH S. PATIL & PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR , JJ.
DATE : 25.02.2025 PER COURT :
.
The petitioners, who are similarly situated, are taking exception to the similar orders passed by respondent No. 4 - the Education Officer (Secondary), refusing to grant approval to their appointment as a 'Shikshan Sevak/Sevika' on the ground that they were not recruited through the 'Pavitra Portal', as per the Government Resolution dated 23.06.2017.
2.
We have heard both sides finally.
3.
The issue is no longer res integra. We have consistently held in several matters that refusing to grant approval solely on the ground that the appointments were not in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 23.06.2017 would not be legally sustainable, as has been elaborately held in the matter of Shaikh Jaweria Khadarsab v/s. The State of Maharashtra through its Secretary and others; Writ Petition No. 13150 of 2022, decided on 10.06.2024.
2/3
4.
Independently, in similar circumstances, few other 'Shikshan Sevaks' from the same institution who were also refused approval, were before this Court in writ petition No. 11512 of 2024. By the order dated 15.10.2024, the writ petition was allowed and the Education Officer (Secondary) was directed to reconsider the proposals on its own merits, except rejecting it by referring to Government Resolution dated 23.06.2017.
5.
We, therefore, allow the Writ Petitions, quash and set aside the orders in both these petitions, and direct respondent No. 4 - the Education Officer (Secondary) to reconsider the proposals on their own merits but shall not reject by referring to the Government Resolution dated 23.06.2017.
6.
The decision shall be taken as expeditiously as possible and, in any case, within five (05) weeks.
(PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) jhs/ 3/3