Bombay High CourtWP/1890/2015dispossed offdismiss for default

Mr. Subhash S/O Ruprao Gotmare v. State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, Deptt Of Education, Mumbai And Another

2015-04-15Hon'Ble Shri Justice B. P. Dharmadhikari,Hon'Ble Shri Justice Sunil B. Shukre2 pages

154wp1890.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION No.1890 of 2015 (Subhash s/o. Ruprao Gotmare .vs. State, through its Secretary, Deptt. Of Edu., Mumbai and anr.) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Mr.R.R.Vyas, Adv. for the petitioner.

Ms Tajwar Khan, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2. CORAM : B.P.DHARMADHIKARI & S.B.SHUKRE, JJ.

DATE : 15.4.2015.

Heard.

After hearing the learned Counsel on 7.4.2015, the matter was adjourned to today.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner is only seeking inquiry by the Education Officer against fabrication of documents by Sau.K.D.Mungale, Head Mistress of Vithalrao Chamat High School, Dighori. Learned A.G.P. submits that no such representation has been made by the petitioner to the Education Officer. The petitioner appears to have made only police complaint and the police Authorities have asked the Education Officer to verify. She further points out that the petitioner has no locus in the matter.

We find that Sau.K.D.Mungale is not a party/respondent before this Court. Similarly, the petitioner claims that she has shown false experience, but from

154wp1890.15 paragraph no.2 of police complaint, the exact implication of this allegation cannot be comprehended. The petitioner has not made any representation directly to the Education Officer.

In this situation, no cognizance of such grievance can be taken in the present Writ Petition. Hence, the Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE jaiswal