Sulakshana Sanjeevan Khanke vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 11045 Bom

                                        .. 1 ..

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                    1054 WRIT PETITION NO.6826 OF 2021

SULAKSHANA SANJEEVAN KHANKE                                           .. Petitioner
          VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS                                 ..Respondents
                          ...
               Dr. R.J. Godbole, Advocate for the Petitioner
               Mr A.R. Kale, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 3
          Mr S.A. Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 & 5
                                    ...

                                CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                        R.N. LADDHA, JJ.

DATE : 13-08-2021 PER COURT : -

1. The proposal seeking approval to the transfer of the petitioner

from unaided to aided post is rejected. Aggrieved thereby, the present

writ petition.

2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the

learned AGP and the learned Counsel for the Institution.

3. The proposal of the petitioner is basically rejected on the

ground that backlog exists of reserved category candidates and the

Circular dated 28-06-2016. The Management has filed an

undertaking that the Management would take steps to fill in the

Gajanan

.. 2 ..

backlog of reserved posts. The said undertaking is accepted and

taken on record. The same is marked as "X" for identification.

4. The petitioner is transferred from unaided to aided post. It is

stated that there are 14 posts of reserved candidates vacant and total

vacant posts are 15. The petitioner is from general category.

5. The Education Officer ought to have considered whether the

post is available for general category candidate.

6. The undertaking is filed by the Management that it would fill

in the reserved category posts. The same is accepted by us.

7. We had also observed in the Judgment and order dated

04-07-2019 in Writ Petition No.1493 of 2018 with connected Writ

Petition, that some of the clauses of Circular dated 28-06-2016 are

erroneous.

8. In light of the above, we pass the following order.

(i) The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

(ii) The Education Officer shall reconsider the proposal seeking

approval to the transfer of the petitioner from unaided to aided post.

Gajanan

.. 3 ..

It shall verify whether the post is available for the general category

candidate on the aided post and if the same is available, then the

proposal shall not be rejected on the ground that backlog of reserved

category candidates exists.

(iii) The Education Officer shall also consider the Judgment of this

Court dated 04-07-2019 in Writ Petition No.1493 of 2018 with

connected writ petition.

(iv) The proposal shall be decided afresh in light of the

observations made above, preferably within four months.

9. Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

     [ R.N. LADDHA ]                           [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA ]
         JUDGE                                          JUDGE
                                       ...




Gajanan