Ratnakar Mahadev Mali v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr Principal Secrtary And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3131 OF 2025 Ratnakar Mahadev Mali

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra Ors.

...Respondents

------ Mr. Prathamesh P. Magadum a/w Chetan G. Patil & Mandar G. Bagkar, for the Petitioner.

Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP, for Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 5-State. Mr. Gajraj A. Mali, for Respondent Nos.3 & 4. ------ Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar & Pravin S. Patil, JJ.

Date: April 06, 2026 P.C.:

1.

Heard Mr. Magadum, learned Counsel along with Mr. Patil, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner, Mr. Kalel, learned AGP, for Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5, and Mr. Mali, learned Counsel appearing for Respondent Nos.3 and 4.

2.

At the outset, learned Counsel for the Petitioner seeks leave to amend the prayer clauses that Respondent No.6 is to be read as Respondent No.5. Leave as sought is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith. Reveriication is dispensed with.

3.

The Petitioner has approached before this Court seeking directions against Respondent Nos.1, 2 and 5 for sanctioning/approving the post on which he was appointed w.e.f. 9th June 2003 as a full-time teaching post and, consequently, for granting approval to his appointment on a full-time basis.

4.

According to the Petitioner, the post on which he was appointed was unaided from the academic years 2003-2004 till 30th November 2020, and it became partially aided from 1st December 2020. As the post became partially aided, the Petitioner has time and again approached the Respondents seeking redressal of his grievance. However, despite several attempts, his grievance has not been redressed. He further stated that, in the year 2022, he approached the Grievance Redressal Committee, raising all the issues that are raised in the present Petition. However, the said Committee also did not decide his grievance on the ground of jurisdiction.

5.

In the background of above said factual position, the Petitioner made the last representation to the Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur on 3rd September 2024, thereby seeking all service beneits as a full-time teacher. But for considerable period, there is no response from Deputy Director of Education, therefore approached before this Court in the matter.

6.

According to the learned AGP, the Petitioner is not entitled to the relief which he has sought in the present matter. However, if direction are issued then Deputy Director of Education can decide the representation on its own merits.

7.

In the background of the above factual position, it will be appropriate that the Deputy Director of Education be directed to consider all the aspects which have been raised in the representation dated 3rd September 2024, after granting hearing opportunity to all the parties and set aside the same on its own merits. 8.

Accordingly, the Writ Petition is disposed of with the direction to the Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur, to decide the pending representation dated 3rd September 2024. 9.

The parties are directed to appear before the Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur on 20th April 2026. After granting hearing opportunity to all the stakeholders, the representation shall be decided as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of 8 weeks thereafter.

10.

With this direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. 11.

All the contentions raised in the Petition are expressly kept open. [Pravin S. Patil, J.] [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.]