Shradha Manoharao Patil v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:17355-DB 1 949(ii).WP-12804-2022.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No. 12804 / 2022 Shradha Manoharao Patil Age : 32 years, Occu. Service R/o Shri Nagar Colony, Bidar Road, Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur.

...Petitioner

Versus

1.

State of Maharashtra Through it's Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2.

The Deputy Director of Education (Secondary), Latur Division, Latur.

3.

The Secretary, Lok Jagruti Shikshan Sanstha, Valandi, Tq. Deoni, Dist. Latur.

4.

The Head Master, Vivekvardhani Higher Secondary School, Tq. Deoni,Dist. Latur. ..Respondents _ _ _ Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Dayanand S. Mali A.G.P. for Respondents/State : Mr. S.P. Joshi Advocate for Respondent No.3 and 4 : Mr. V.S. Panpatte _ _ _ CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 06 AUGUST 2024 E 2024

2 949(ii).WP-12804-2022.doc PER COURT :

.

Heard.

2.

Petitioner's proposal seeking approval to her appointment came to be rejected by the respondent No. 2/Deputy Director of Education, Latur Division, Latur vide impugned order dated 29.08.2022 only on the ground that the procedure as contemplated by the Government Resolution dated 23.06.2017 was not followed.

3.

We have already taken a view by order dated 10.06.2024 in Writ Petition No. 13150 of 2022 in the matter of Shaikh Jaweria Khadarsab Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others that the Education Officer/Deputy Director of Education has to conduct objective scrutiny of the proposal and it cannot be rejected only on the ground that procedure as contemplated by the Government Resolution was not followed.

4.

In that view of the matter, we dispose of the petition by quashing the impugned order dated 29.08.2022 and directing the respondent No. 2/Deputy Director of Education to reconsider the proposal of the petitioner for grant of approval to her appointment on its own merits. The decision shall be taken as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of four

3 949(ii).WP-12804-2022.doc

(04) weeks from today. However, same shall not be rejected on the grounds mentioned in the impugned order.

SHAILESH P. BRAHME MANGESH S. PATIL JUDGE JUDGE Najeeb..