← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/2262/2025disposed off

Vivek Vishnu Raut And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr The Secretary School Education Dept. And ORS

2025-02-24Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Ashwin D. Bhobe2 pages

Digitally signed by GAURI AMIT GAEKWAD Date:

2025.03.10 16:07:38 +0530 31(i).WP-2262-2025.odt GAURI AMIT GAEKWAD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2262 OF 2025 Vivek Vishnu Raut and Ors.

....Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ....Respondents ---- Mr. Satish S. Raut a/w. Mr. Tanmay M. Shembavanekar for the Petitioners.

Mr. K.S. Thorat, B Panel Counsel fro Respondent Nos.1 to 3. ---- CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.

DATE : 24th FEBRUARY, 2025 P.C. :- 1.

Approval to the appointment of Petitioner No.1 employee as a Shikshan Sevak, was granted vide order dated 4th August, 2021, and Petitioner No.1 was granted approval for a period of three years as a Shikshan Sevak with effect from 15th June, 2019. Petitioner No.1 has, therefore, completed three years on 15th June, 2022. It is stated on instructions that Petitioner No.1 is still working and is deemed to be inducted as an Assistant Teacher. 2.

We, however, notice that Petitioner No.2 Management has not forwarded the proposal of Petitioner No.1, for grant of approval as an Assistant Teacher, to Respondent No.3. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits, on instructions that the This order has been modified by speaking to the minutes of the order dated 6.3.2025. Gauri Gaekwad

31(i).WP-2262-2025.odt Management would forward such proposal within 15 days. 3.

Respondent No.3 would deal with the proposal tendered by the Management by conducting a meticulous verification exercise. If he concludes that Petitioner No.1 is not entitled for approval, a reasoned order shall be passed and the Petitioners would be communicated of such order. The aggrieved party, thereafter, is at liberty to avail of a remedy as is permissible in law.

4.

If the approval is granted, Petitioner No.2 would forward the proposal to Respondent No.2 for seeking Shalarth ID, who shall deal with the said proposal on its own merits keeping in mind that this Court has ruled that once an approval is granted, Shalarth ID should be granted.

5.

In view of the above, this Petition is disposed off. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) This order has been modified by speaking to the minutes of the order dated 6.3.2025. Gauri Gaekwad