Rajshree Rahul Lomte vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 1127 Bom

                                         1                            49 wp 795-21.odt

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     49 WRIT PETITION NO.795 OF 2021

                         RAJSHREE RAHUL LOMTE
                                   VERSUS
                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                      ...
               Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. A.A. Mimbalkar h/f
                            Mr. S.V. Deshmukh
               AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2: Mr. S.R. Yadav
                                      ...

                                    CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                              SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
                                    DATED : 18th JANUARY , 2021.
                                        ...
PER COURT :

1.       The proposal seeking approval to the transfer of the

petitioner from unaided to aided is rejected.                      Mr. Nimbalkar,

learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon 4 th July, 2019 in

Writ Petition No. 1493 of 2018 with connected writ petitions to

contend that this Court has held that some of the clauses of

Circular dated 28th June, 2016 do not apply.



2.       Under the impugned order the proposal is rejected relying

upon, the circular dated 28.06.2016 and as per the roster there

are seven posts of reserved category candidates vacant.




     ::: Uploaded on - 21/01/2021                    ::: Downloaded on - 08/02/2021 04:41:10 :::
                                     2                          49 wp 795-21.odt




3.       We have heard the learned AGP for respondent Education

Officer.



4.       We have under our judgment dated 4 th July, 2019 in Writ

Petition 1493 of 2018 with connected writ petitions held that

same of the clauses of Government Resolution dated 28th June,

2016 do not apply. Ofcourse, the Education Officer is required

to consider the seniority and the availability of the vacant posts.

It is submitted that the petitioner is transferred from general

category.          The Education Officer will be required to consider

whether the post exists for general category in aided division in

case

5.       In light of above, we pass the following order:

                                    ORDER

1). The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

The Education Officer shall decide the proposal seeking

approval to the transfer of the petitioner from unaided

to aided division in tune with the judgment dated 4 th

July, 2019 in Writ Petition No.1493 of 2018 with

connected writ petitions.

3 49 wp 795-21.odt

2). The Education Officer shall certainly consider the

seniority, the availability of the post for general

category. In case the post is available for general

category in aided division, then the same shall not be

rejected only on the ground that there are posts for

reserved category also vacant.

3). The proposal shall be decided afresh

expeditiously preferably within four months.

4) Writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

vsm/-