Manisha Late Vikas Thakur v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:35121-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 14904 OF 2025 Manisha Late Vikas Thakur

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Others Mr. S. C. Yeramwar, Advocate for petitioner Mr. R. S. Wani, AGP for respondent-State

CORAM

: Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.

DATE : 11th December, 2025 PER COURT :- 1.

Petitioner filed present petition seeking directions to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 to grant approval of the appointment of petitioner on the post of 'Peon' in Regular Pay Scale with effect from 10.07.2021 as the petitioner has successfully completed three years period as 'Shipai Sevak' on 09.07.2021. Petitioner further seeks direction to forthwith release salary of the petitioner as Peon in Regular Pay Scale with effect from 10.07.2021 till date. In case of the petitioner, petitioner was appointed on compassionate basis on the post of 'peon' with respondent No. 4. After the appointment of the petitioner, the approval was granted to the provisional appointment of the petitioner on 01.09.2022. Further the case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has completed three years of her service and therefore, respondent No. 4 forwarded her proposal for permanent approval to respondent No. 3. The said proposal is still pending and no decision has been taken. 2.

We have perused the documents which are annexed to the 940-WP-14904-2025odt

present petition. The petitioner's appointment order which is placed on record clearly mentions that petitioner has been appointed on permanent post of peon on compassionate ground and further the order of appointment seeks of the clause pertaining to appointment on probation for a period of two years and mentions (Anukampa permanent). In the light of this order of appointment, it is clear that the petitioner on 07.07.2018 was appointed on permanent basis in the said post and therefore, there is no reason as to why two approvals are necessary to be obtained from respondent No. 4. In our considered view, once the approval has been granted to the service of the petitioner on 01.09.2022 on the basis of the appointment order dated 07.07.2018 then there is no necessity of any further approval to the services of the present petition. 3.

In the light of the above, the petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clause 'B'. Respondent No. 2 and 3 are directed to set right the order issued on 01.09.2022 by issuing a fresh approval order of the petitioner in respect of her appointment on the permanent post of peon. Such orders to be passed within a period of two weeks from today and further directed to release the salary of the petitioner as per her pay scale within further period of two weeks.

4.

Petition stands disposed of.

(Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, J.) B. S. Joshi 940-WP-14904-2025odt