Appa Balbhim Thorat v. The State Of Maharashtra And ORS

Shailaja

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.12408 of 2025 Appa Balbhim Thorat ] Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra and others ] Respondents .....

Mr. Utkarsh Desai i/b Mr. Prashant Bhavake, for Petitioner. Ms. T.J. Kapre, A.G.P, for Respondent - State. .....

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

DATE : 17th DECEMBER, 2025.

P.C:

1.

Heard Mr. Desai, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Ms. Kapre, learned A.G.P, for respondent - State. 2.

Learned Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is working as "Assistant Teacher" in respondent No.6 - Karmayogi Sudhakarpant Paricharak Kanistha Mahavidyalaya, Umbre (Page), Taluka Pandharpur (for short "Higher Secondary School"). He submits that the petitioner was appointed as "Assistant Teacher" and there were no legal impediments in the appointment of the petitioner. He would further submit that after assessing the SHAILAJA SHRIKANT HALKUDE SHRIKANT HALKUDE Date: 2025.12.20 10:35:30 +0530

documents on record, respondent No.4 - The Deputy Director of Education has granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner in unaided post of Assistant Teacher vide order dated 13th May, 2016. He would further submit that a proposal is also submitted by respondent No.6 for grant of Shalarth ID and to include the petitioner's name in Shalarth system. Learned Counsel would fairly submit that the occasion to seek Shalarth ID arose because petitioner was initially appointed on unaided post of Assistant Teacher. Later on, the post became partially aided and as such, the petitioner is in need of getting his name included in the Shalarth System. He would further submit that since the appointment of the petitioner is duly approved by the Competent Authority i.e by Deputy Director of Education, in this case, we direct Divisional Chairman of Higher Secondary Education, Pune which is the Competent Authority to include the petitioner's name in Shalarth System. 3.

In view of the earlier orders passed by this Court in number of matters, there should not be any hindrance for the Competent Authority i.e respondent No.2 to include the name of the petitioner in Shalarth Shalarth System if the proposal is duly approved by the Competent Authority- Deputy Director of Education in this case, unless and except if an objection is raised in respect of genuineness of the documents which are part of the record.

4.

In view of this, respondent No.2 - Divisional Chairman/Secretary, the Maharashtra State Secondary and Higher Secondary Educatinal Board, Pune to include name of the petitioner in Shalarth System within a period of eight weeks from today and grant Shalarth ID.

5.

Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 6.

All contentions are kept open.

7.

Concerned Authority may call for an explanation from the petitioner as also from the Management.

[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.] [M.S. KARNIK, J.]