Satish Balajirao Chintalwad v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:37313-DB wp 13707.25.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 910 WRIT PETITION NO. 13707 OF 2025 Satish Balajirao Chintalwad

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Principal Secretary And Others ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. T M Venjane AGP for Respondents: Mr. R.S.Wani ...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

Dated : December 23, 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

Present petition challenges the communication dated 11.4.2025 issued by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Parbhani, thereby refusing to forward the proposal for inclusion name of the petitioner in 'Shalartha ID. 2.

Learned AGP waives notice for respondent nos.1 to 4. No necessity to issue notice to respondent nos.5 and 6. 3.

Learned Advocate for the petitioner submits that respondent no.4 has no authority to decide the said proposal but he was supposed to simply forward the proposal to respondent no.3. However, by impugned communication, he has almost decided and refused to forward the proposal.

wp 13707.25.odt 4.

Learned advocate for the petitioner relies on our orders dated 18.11.2025 and 20.11.2025 in writ petition no.13681 of 2025 and WP no.12797 of 2025, respectively.

5.

In view of our order in writ petition no.13681 of 2025 now the circular has been issued by respondent no.2 as to what should be the procedure to be adopted by the respondent no.4. There is no dispute that the decision to include name of the petitioner in 'Shalartha ID' has to be taken by respondent no.3 and not by respondent no.4. The respondent no.4 had no authority to decide and he is supposed to simply forward the proposal with his remarks, if any. He cannot return or refuse to forward by pointing out the alleged deficiencies. We, therefore set aside the communication dated 11.4.2025 issued by respondent no.4. We direct the respondent no.4 to get the proposal from the Management afresh within a period of one week and forward it to respondent no.3 within one week thereafter. Respondent no.3 to decide the same upon it's own merits within a period of (3) Three months from the date of receipt of the forwarding of proposal by the respondent no.4 to him. Writ petition stands disposed of.

( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) AAA/- ...