Yuvarani D/O Krushnrao Choudhari v. Shri. Prashant Shikshan Sanstha, Khadki, Thr. President, Namdeorao M. Shelotkar And ORS.

2025:BHC-NAG:12132-DB 1 908-wp-6566-25j.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6566 OF 2025 Yuvarani D/o. Krushnarao Choudhari, Aged about 48 years, Occ. Service, R/o. R. A. Kadu, 37-B, Purva Township, Shegaon to Arjun Nagar Road, Amravati.

. . . PETITIONER // V E R S U S //

1. Shri Prashant Shikshan Sanstha, Khadki Tah. Asti, Dist. Wardha, Registration No.

F-513, through its President Shri Namdeorao Mahadevrao Shelotkar,

2. The Regional Deputy Commissioner, Social Welfare Department, Social Welfare Bhawan, Maltakdi Road, Amravati.

3. The District Disability Empowerment Officer Zilla Parisad, Amravati.

4. Harish S/o. Digambarrao Wahane, Aged about 44 years, Occ. Service, R/o. Near Telephpone Tower, Najarpur, Amravati, Dist. Buldhana.

. . . RESPONDENTS --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri Nikhil A. Waghmare h/f. Shri P. B. Patil, Advocate for petitioner. Shri Ketan Bhoskar, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Ms. Prachi Joshi, AGP for respondent nos. 2 and 3/State. Shri P. R. Agrawal a/w. Ms. S. H. Bhagat, Advocate for respondent no. 4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM :- SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR & M. W. CHANDWANI, JJ.

DATED :- 12.11.2025 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER:

M. W. CHANDWANI , J.) :-

2 908-wp-6566-25j.odt Heard.

2.

Since, Shri Ketan Bhoskar, Advocate has appeared on behalf of respondent no. 1 therefore, Civil Application (CAW) No. 2621/2025 for amending the address of respondent no. 1 does not survive. Hence, the application stands disposed of. 3.

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the learned counsels for the parties. 4.

The petition challenges the notice dated 18.10.2025 issued by respondent no. 1 on the basis of the order dated 17.10.2025 issued by respondent no. 2 directing the petitioner to hand over the charge of the post of Headmaster to respondent no. 4. 5.

The petitioner is the Headmistress in the school run by respondent no. 1 since 24.06.2010. However, all of a sudden, respondent no. 2 passed the impugned order directing the petitioner to handover the charge of the post of Headmaster to respondent no. 4. 6.

The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that, without hearing the petitioner or following the due process of law and principles of natural justice, respondent no. 2 has passed the impugned order on the application filed by respondent no. 4 who has

3 908-wp-6566-25j.odt claimed the post of Headmaster. It is further contended that, in the proceedings filed by respondent no. 4 claiming priority over the petitioner on the post of Headmaster, the petitioner was not even made a party.

7.

Having heard the learned counsels for the respective parties and having gone through the record and the impugned order, it is crystallized that no notice was issued to the petitioner before respondent no. 2 passed the impugned order dated 17.10.2025. Thus, the principles of natural justice have not been followed before passing the impugned order which directly affects the petitioner. 8.

Hence, we quash and set aside the impugned notice dated 18.10.2025 and the order dated 17.10.2025 and remand the matter back to respondent no. 2 who shall, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, pass appropriate orders on the application filed by respondent no. 4. The parties to appear before respondent no. 2 on 11.12.2025 at 11:00 am.

9.

In the above-said terms, the petition is disposed of. (M. W. CHANDWANI, J.) (SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, J.) Signed by: Mr. Rajnesh Jaiswal Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/11/2025 12:21:59 RR Jaiswal