Monali Nanasaheb Pawar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2024:BHC-AUG:10594-DB 1 wp 13878.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13878 OF 2019 Monali Nanasaheb Pawar .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri V. P. Latange, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mrs. Kalplata B. Patil Bharaswadkar, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3.

Shri A. R. Nikam, Advocate for the Respondent No. 4. Shri N. N. Desale, Advocate for the Respondent No. 5. CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 12 JUNE, 2024.

FINAL ORDER :

.

Mr. Latange, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has secured 110 marks and was from 20 % English Medium Course. The cut off mark was 100, still, the petitioner is not issued with the appointment order. 2.

Mr. Nikam, the learned counsel submits that upon the query made by the Deputy Director of Education (Primary), it has been communicated on 03.02.2018 that the petitioner has secured 110 marks and the cut off marks were 100 in general category.

2 wp 13878.19 3.

In case, the cut off marks were 100 and the petitioner has secured 110 marks, then certainly the case of the petitioner ought to have been considered from 20 % English Medium (General Category) as the letter of the Maharashtra State Council dated 03.02.2018 clearly mentions that the petitioner has secured 110 marks from 20 % English Medium and the cut off marks were 100 as per the revaluation.

4.

In light of that, the Director of Education shall consider the case of the petitioner for appointment on the post of Shikshan Sevak on its own merits and the decision shall be taken expeditiously, and preferably within a period of six (06) weeks from today. The respondents shall consider the list. 5.

Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ] bsb/June 24