Shazia Muzaffar Baig v. The State Of Maharashtra Throu. The Sec. School Education Dept And ORS
TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE TRUPTI SADANAND BAMNE Date: 2026.01.14 17:43:57 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13060 OF 2025 Shazia Muzaffar Baig ... Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents ...
Mr.Vinayak R. Kumbhar with Mr.Rajendra B. Khaire and Mr.Aniket S. Phapale i/b. Ms.Ashwini N. Bandiwadekar for the Petitioner. Ms.Priyanka Chavan, AGP for the Respondent -State. ...
CORAM :
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 13, 2026 P.C:
1.
The proposal submitted by the Management dated 01.07.2022, seeking approval for the appointment of the Petitioner, is pending with Respondent No. 2.
2.
In view of the above, this Petition is disposed off with the following directions:
(a) Respondent No. 2 would scrutinize the proposal, raise all objections/point out the deficiencies, within a period of 21 days from today, and communicate ...1
the same to Respondent No. 3 (Management);
(b) The Management would be granted an opportunity to cure the deficiencies within a period of 21 days, thereafter;
(c) If the revised proposal is submitted by the Management to Respondent No. 2, the same would be considered on its merits and a reasoned order would be passed;
(d) If the proposal is accepted and approval is granted, the Shalarth ID would also be allocated by following the due procedure laid down in law. If the proposal is rejected, the aggrieved party would be at liberty to avail of a remedy as may be permissible in law;
(e) Needless to state, Respondent No. 2 would carry out a meticulous inquiry and consider each and every aspect legally expected of the authority while deciding the said proposal;
...2
(f) If the pending proposal has already been decided and an order has already been passed, the same would be communicated to the Management within a period of five working days from today.
(ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) ...3