Vidarbha Youth Welfare Society, Amravati, Thr. Its Secretary And Another v. State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, Dept. Of School Education And Sports Dept., Mumbai And ANR.

(1) 949 caw 795-2026+1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO. 795 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 541 OF 2026 WITH WITH CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO. 796 OF 2026 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 540 OF 2026 Vidarbha Youth Welfare Society, Amravati, through its Secretary and another Vs.

State of Maharashtra and another -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Shri R.D. Bhuibhare, Advocate for petitioners Ms H.N. Jaipurkar, AGP for respondent/State Shri P.S. Giredekar, Advocate for intervenor CORAM :

SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR AND NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : 01.04.2026 Both these applications are for seeking intervention. The respective applicants contend that the present writ petitions challenges communication dated 06.01.2026 and 03.11.2025 issued by the respondent No.2 whereby approval to the transfer of the present applicant has been stayed and directed the disbursal of salary from the previous school. The applicant in C.A. No. 795/2026 submits that he is working as an Assistant Teacher and was originally serving in Sukhdeorao Patil Secondary School, Vadura, Tahsil Nandgaon (Khandeshwar), District Amravati,

(2) 949 caw 795-2026+1 and the applicant in C.A. No. 796/2026 submits that he is working as an Assistant Teacher and was originally serving in Secondary School and Junior College Palaskhed, Tahsil Chandur Railway, District Amravati, who came to be transferred by the petitioner No.1 to the petitioner No.2 vide order dated 05.08.2025 on administrative grounds. It is therefore their contention that their presence is necessary for the proper adjudication of the matter.

2.

We have heard learned Counsel for the applicants, as also learned Counsel for the petitioners. 3.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners has no objection for impleading them as an intervenor. 4.

Learned Assistant Government Pleader has raised objection and opposed the application for intervention. However, for the reasons as stated in paragraph Nos. 3, 4, 5 and 6, the applications are allowed.

5.

The petitioners are directed to implead the intervenor as a respondent No.3 in present matters and to serve them a copy of the petition.

6.

Both applications are accordingly allowed and disposed of.

7.

The amendment to be carried out within one working week.

8.

Place the matter for further consideration on 24.04.2026.

(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) Jayashree..