Miraj Vidya Samiti Thru Chairaman And ANR v. The State Of Maharashtra Thru Secretary, School Edu. Dept. And ANR
17. wp 4223.19.doc Urmila Ingale
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4223 OF 2019 Miraj Vidya Samiti Sangli and anr.
.. Petitioners Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and anr.
.. Respondents Mr.Ashutosh B. Patil i/b Mr.Vinayak R.Kumbhar, for the Petitioners.
Mr.K.S.Thorat, AGP for State.
CORAM : M.S.KARNIK, J.
DATE : 08th APRIL, 2019 P.C. :
.
Rule. By consent, Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally. Learned AGP waives service of Rule for Respondents.
2.
Learned AGP raised objection that that the order impugned in this Petition which is at page 26 of the paperbook is not really an order rejecting the proposal for approval of the appointment of the petitioner No.2 as assistant teacher. Learned AGP would submit that the order records that the proposal has to be submitted by the petitioner No.1 Management in terms of 1/2
17. wp 4223.19.doc G.R. dated 20/06/2014 in the camp which is organized in that regard.
3.
In this view of the matter, though it is stated that the proposal would be submitted for individual approval in the camp to be held, the decision on the proposal cannot be delayed indefinitely. In these circumstances, camp as per G.R. dated 20/06/2014 is to be held when the proposal can be submitted. Learned Counsel for the petitioners would submit a proposal when such a camp is held. It is made clear that if no such camp is held within a period of 2 months from today, the petitioners are at liberty to file proposal before the Education Officer within a period of 4 weeks thereafter, which proposal shall be decided on its own merits by Education Officer without insistence on his part to have the proposal decided in the camp. 4.
With these observations, Rule is made partly absolute and disposed of in the above terms.
(M.S.KARNIK, J.) 2/2