Lahare Dnyaneshwari Deepak v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Principal Secretary And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:10038-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 937 WRIT PETITION NO.4845 OF 2024 LAHARE DNYANESHWARI DEEPAK

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. S.T. Shelke, Advocate for petitioner Mr. K.S. Patil, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. S.S. Wagh, Advocate for respondent No.3 ...

CORAM :

SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, JJ.

DATE :

07th MAY, 2024 ORDER :

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 and learned Advocate Mr. S.S. Wagh for respondent No.3.

It appears that when proposal in respect of appointment of the petitioner has been decided by respondent No.2 by order dated 04.04.2024, he had found some deficiencies. In fact, when deficiencies in respect of the documents are found, this Court in earlier occasions has categorically instructed the Education Officer that they shall not reject the proposals but, give an opportunity by calling upon the Management to produce the

WP_4845_2024 documents in respect of which the deficiencies are found. Still the directions of this Court are not adhered to.

Learned counsel for respondent No.3, on instructions, makes a statement that fresh proposal would be sent after removing the deficiencies those have been quoted in the impugned order dated 04.04.2024. We are of the considered opinion that the order dated 04.04.2024 should be treated as intimation to respondent No.3 regarding deficiencies and thereupon respondent No.3 to file fresh proposal by removing those deficiencies or giving appropriate reasons for the said in the proposal. Such proposal should be sent to respondent No.2 within a period of six (6) weeks from today. After receipt of fresh proposal, respondent No.2 to decide the same, on it's own merits within a period of two (2) months thereafter. Decision so taken be informed to the respondent No.3. In view of these directions, the order dated 04.04.2024 is hereby quashed and set aside. Writ Petition thereby stands partly allowed and disposed of.

(S.G. CHAPALGAONKAR, J.) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) agd