Lalit Suresh Shinde v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 93 WRIT PETITION NO.10270 OF 2019 LALIT SURESH SHINDE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr Pawar Ajay D.

AGP for Respondents State: Mr P. G. Borade Advocate for Respondent No.3 : Mr. Chetan T. Jadhav

CORAM

: S. V. GANGAPURWALA & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

DATE : 15th October, 2019 ORDER:

1.

The proposal seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner is rejected solely on the ground that appointment of the petitioner is not through Pavitra Portal. Learned counsel submits that the petitioner was appointed on 1st January, 2018. At that time Pavitra Portal was not activated and it was activated in June, 2018 and same has become operative from 20th June, 2018. 2.

We have, in writ petition No. 12701/2018, under order dated 2nd July, 2019 observed as under: "5. We have specifically asked the learned AGP as to when the Pavitra Portal became operative. The learned AGP, on instructions, submits that the same became operative on 20.06.2019. the Pavitra Portal modalities were introduced and finalized, whereas, according to the learned counsel for the

petitioner and Management, Pavitra Portal is activated in January, 2019."

3.

The appointment of the petitioner was prior to Pavitra Portal became operative. In light of that the reasons given for rejecting the proposal for approval does not appear to be proper.

4. The impugned order is quashed ad set aside. The Education officer shall decide the proposal seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner afresh, on its own merits and the same shall not be rejected on the ground on which the impugned order is passed. The same shall be decided within six months.

5.

Writ petition disposed of. No costs.

(ANIL S. KILOR, J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J.) JPC