Sandhya Dayanand Gaikwad v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Secretary And Others

(1) 945 WP 1098.2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 945 WRIT PETITION NO. 1098 OF 2025 SANDHYA DAYANAND GAIKWAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ANOTHER ...

Mr. Anand Dale, Advocate holding for Mr. Swapnil S. Rathi, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. V.M. Kagane, A.G.P. for respondent/State. ...

CORAM :

MANGESH S. PATIL & PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR, JJ.

DATED :

23 JANUARY 2025 ORDER:- .

Heard both sides.

2.

The petitioner is challenging the communication whereby, the respondent Education Officer (Secondary), vide his letter dated 13.09.2022 (Exhibit-E) addressed to the headmaster, has refused / rejected the proposal for correction of the school record, on the ground that the petitioner had already left the school and the proposal was being submitted after the form of 10th standard was submitted to the Secondary and Higher Secondary Board.

3.

In the light of Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code as examined and interpreted by the Full Bench of this court in the case of Janabai Himmatrao Thakur vs State of Maharashtra and others,

(2) 945 WP 1098.2025.odt (2019) 6 Mah L J 769, the Education Officer will have to undertake an enquiry and explore if the request of the petitioner can be considered, being an obvious mistake, as interpreted therein. 4.

Writ petition is allowed partly and the impugned order is quashed and set aside. The Education Officer shall decide the proposal afresh in the light Janabai Thakur (supra), as expeditiously as possible and in any case within six weeks. (PRAFULLA S. KHUBALKAR) (MANGESH S. PATIL) JUDGE JUDGE VD_Dhirde