Mrs.Ragini Rajesh Puranik vs State Of Maharashtra
2017 Latest Caselaw 5776 Bom

                                         (1)                     WP No. 6560/2004


            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD.


                        WRIT PETITION NO. 6560 OF 2004


                         RAGINI RAJESH PURANIK
                                 VERSUS
                   THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS
                                       ***
 Mr. S.P. Shah, holding for learned Counsel Mr. D.P. Palodkar, 
 Advocate for the petitioner.
 Mr. S.B. Joshi, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
 Mr. K.C. Sant, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.
                                       ***


                                      CORAM :  R.D. DHANUKA &
                                               SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ.

                                      Dated    :  08-08-2017.


                                       ***

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER R.D. DHANUKA, J.) :-

1. By this petition, the petitioner seeks writ of certiorari

or any other appropriate writ thereby praying for quashing and

setting aside the impugned order dated 02-08-2004 passed by

the Education Officer (Second), Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon

cancelling the approval granted to the petitioner earlier to the

post of Sangit Sikshan Sevak.

(2) WP No. 6560/2004

2. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of

deciding this petition are as under :-

Pursuant to an advertisement issued by the

Management, the petitioner had applied for the post of "Sangit

Shikshan Sevak" Petitioner was appointed to the said post by

respondent Nos.3 and 4 on 23-01-2002 for the period from 23-

01-2002 to 22-01-2005. Appointment of the petitioner was

approved by respondent No.2 vide his order dated 26-09-2002.

3. On 02-08-2004 respondent No.2 passed an order and

communicated it to respondent No.3 that the approval granted

to the post of the petitioner was cancelled for the reason that the

said appointment was made without clearing the backlog and

without mentioning of backlog in the advertisement issued by

the Management. This order of cancellation of approval by

respondent No. 2 has been impugned by the petitioner in this

petition.

4. This Court has granted interim relief in terms of

prayer Clause (C) thereby staying operation of the order dated

(3) WP No. 6560/2004

02.08.2004 passed by respondent No.2.

5. During the pendency of this petition, petitioner has

been already appointed to the post of Assistant Teacher by the

Management and his appointment is already approved by

respondent No.2 vide order dated 26-09-2009. The petitioner

has been working as Assistant Teacher since 2007.

6. In our view, since the appointment of the petitioner

made to the post of Assistant Teacher subsequently has been

already approved by respondent No. 2 on 26-09-2007 and the

impugned order dated 02-08-2004 passed by respondent No.2

was stayed by this Court on 20-01-2005, nothing survives in this

Writ Petition. It is however made clear that the respondents will

not be permitted to re-open the issue of appointment of the

petitioner to the post of Shikshan Sevak as well as to the post of

Assistant Teacher. Disposal of this petition will not affect the

approval granted by respondent No.2 to the petitioner to the

post of Assistant Teacher vide order dated 26-09-2007.

(4) WP No. 6560/2004

7. Writ Petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs.

          ( SUNIL K. KOTWAL)                     ( R.D. DHANUKA)
                 JUDGE                                    JUDGE



                                       ***
 vdd/