Shree Kalal Ramesh Tukaram vs State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 2814 Bom

                                                                                                40.WP.1756.2020.doc


                                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
         Digitally
Aarti
G.
         signed by
         Aarti G. Palkar
         Date:
         2021.02.18
                                                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
Palkar   12:15:27
         +0530


                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.1756 OF 2020

                           Shree Kalal Ramesh Tukaram                                  ....Petitioner
                                 vs.
                           The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                             ...Respondents


                           Mr. V.S. Deokar i/by Ms Ranjana V. Deokar for the Petitioner.

                           Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.


                                                             CORAM        : S. C. GUPTE AND
                                                                            SURENDRA P. TAVADE, JJ.

                                                             DATE         : 11 FEBRUARY 2021

                           P.C.

1. The grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition is that despite pendency of a proposal since 26.07.2010 for approval of his appointment as a Junior Clerk in the school of Respondent No.3 w.e.f.02.07.2010, there has been no decision by the School Authorities. On these facts, the petition can be conveniently disposed of by directing Respondent No.2-Education Ofcer to consider the proposal for approval to the Petitionerls appointment and pass appropriate order thereon as expeditiously as possible and in any event within a period of six weeks from today. It is ordered accordingly. It is made clear that the Petitionerls approval shall be considered w.e.f. 02.07.2010 and honorarium shall be disbursed accordingly. Since the Petitioner has already completed the probationary period of three years and has since been confrmed in the post of Junior Clerk by Respondent No.3- School, Respondent No.2-Education Ofcer shall also consider the school managementls application for confrmation of the Petitioner as a Junior Clerk after completion of probationary period and issue appropriate orders accordingly for disbursal of grant-in-aid towards the salary of the Petitioner.

                           Aarti Palkar                                                                         1/2
                                                            40.WP.1756.2020.doc

Needless to add that while deciding the proposal, the Education Ofcer shall take into account the judgments delivered by this Court on the subject including the case of Smt. Munoli Rajashri Karabasappa vs. State of Maharashtra Through Secretary & Ors. in Writ Petition No.8587 of 2016 with connected writ petitions.

(SURENDRA P. TAVADE, J)                                  (S.C. GUPTE, J.)




Aarti Palkar                                                               2/2