Devanand Dhondu Jumade And ... vs State Of Maha., Through Its ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 434 Bom

                                                 1/2                       0803WP395.16-Judgment




                                                                                              
                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                           NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.




                                                                    
                          WRIT PETITION NO.  395    OF    2016

     PETITIONERS :-                 1. Devanand   Dhondu   Jumade,   Aged   abt.   30 
                                       years,   Occupation   -   Service,   R/o   - 




                                                                   
                                       Samudrapur,   Post   Samudrapur,   Taluka   - 
                                       Samudrapur, District - Wardha. 
                                    2. Ravindranath   Tagore   Bahu-uddeshiya 
                                       Shikshan   Sanstha,   Pulgaon,   Through   its 
                                       President   -   Shri   Sudhakar   A.   Ghode,   Aged 




                                                   
                                       about   65   years,   Ocupation   -   President   of 
                               ig      Ravindranath   Tagore   Bahu-uddeshiya 
                                       Shikshan   Sanstha,   Pulgaon,   R/o   - 
                                       Thanegaon,     Taluka   -   Karanja,   District 
                                       Wardha. 
                             
                                             ...VERSUS... 

     RESPONDENTS :-                  1. State of Maharashtra, Through Its Secretary, 
                                        Department   of   Secondary   &   Higher 
      

                                        Secondary   Education,   Mantralaya,   Mumbai 
                                        - 32. 
   



                                     2. Education   Officer   (Secondary),   Zilla 
                                        Parishad, Wardha.  

     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





                    Mr. C.B.Dharmadhikari counsel for the petitioners.
                        Mr. H.D.Dubey, counsel for the respondents.
     ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                               CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK &
                                                       V. M. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATED : 08.03.2016

O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A. Naik, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is

heard finally with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2/2 0803WP395.16-Judgment

2. Though a couple of prayers are made in the writ petition,

the learned counsel for the petitioners fairly states that the grievance of

the petitioners would stand redressed if this Court directs the

respondent No.2-Education Officer (Secondary) to decide the proposal

submitted by the petitioner No.2 for grant of approval to the

appointment of the petitioner No.1 on the post of Shikshan Sevak. It is

stated that though the proposal was sent by the petitioner No.2 to the

Education Officer (Secondary) in 2013 and 2015, the respondent No.2-

Education Officer (Secondary) has not decided the proposal till date.

3. Shri Dubey, the learned Assistant Government Pleader

appearing on behalf of the respondent No.2-Education Officer

(Secondary), states that if the proposal is not decided till date, the

respondent No.2-Education Officer (Secondary) would decide the same

as early as possible.

4. In view of the aforesaid, the writ petition is partly allowed.

The respondent No.2-Education Officer (Secondary) is directed to

decide the proposal for grant of approval to the appointment of the

petitioner No.1 as early as possible and positively within a period of

eight weeks. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order

as to costs.

                               JUDGE                                            JUDGE 

     KHUNTE