Reshma D/O Ashok Sawant @ Pooja W/O ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17672 Bom

                                                       29_WPST24057_21.doc


        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
                  WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.24057 OF 2021

Reshma d/o. Ashok Sawant @
Pooja w/o. Deepak Rawool                               ...      Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra and others                        ...      Respondents

Mr. Vilas S. Panpatte for Petitioner.
Mrs. P. J. Gavhane, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 to 4-State.
Mrs. P. D. Shelke for Respondent Nos.5 and 6.

                                    CORAM : R. D. DHANUKA &
                                            R. N. LADDHA, JJ.

                                    DATE     : DECEMBER 20, 2021

P.C. :-

Rule. Mrs. Gavhane, learned AGP waives service for respondent Nos.1 to 4-State. Mrs. Shelke, learned counsel waives service for respondent Nos.5 and 6. By consent of parties, petition is heard finally.

2. By this petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus against respondent No.2 to enter name of the petitioner working with respondent No.6 school in the Shalarth Pranali and to release the salary of the petitioner within a period of six weeks and for other reliefs.

3. It is not in dispute that that the petitioner was appointed on the post of Shikshan Sevak with effect from 01.07.2013. The proposal sent by the management has been approved by the Education Officer on 07.07.2017 for probation period of three years as Shikshan Sevak as well for permanent approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Assistant Teacher on regular basis. The management thereafter submitted a proposal to respondent No.4 for release of salary of the petitioner. The said proposal has not been decided by respondent No.4 till date.

29_WPST24057_21.doc

4. In our view, once the Education Officer has granted approval to the appointment of the petitioner, the Deputy Director of Education cannot withhold the proposal submitted by the management for inclusion of name of the petitioner in the Shalarth Pranali and for release of salary. There are no allegations of fraud, manipulation or suppression in this case against the petitioner or against the management by the respondents. Several orders are passed granting similar reliefs by this Court in catena of decisions some of which are annexed from pages 54 to 57. The judgments of this Court are applicable to the facts of this case. We are respectfully bound by these judgments. We accordingly pass the following order:

(a) Writ Petition is allowed in terms of prayer clauses (C) and (D);

(b) Rule is made absolute accordingly;

(c) There shall be no order as to costs.

5. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this order.

(R. N. LADDHA, J.)                                  (R. D. DHANUKA, J.)



Minal Parab