Bombay High Court
Kishor Kashinath Patil vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 11 January, 2021
Bench: S.P. Deshmukh, Abhay Ahuja
1 36 wp 12564.19.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12564 OF 2019
Kishor s/o. Kashinath Patil
Age 30 years, Occ. Service as
Shikshan Sevak,
R/o. At post Kautha,
Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded.
.. Petitioner
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra
through its Secretary,
School Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2] The Education Officer (Secondary)
Zilla Parishad, Nanded.
3] Janta Shikshan Sanstha,
Kautha, Tq.Kandhar, Dist. Nanded,
through its Secretary.
4] The Head Master,
Janta High School, Kautha,
Tq. Kandhar, Dist. Nanded.
.. Respondents
...
Mr. V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. S.P. Sonpawale, AGP for respondents No.1 and 2
Mr. I.D. Maniyar, Advocate for respondents No. 3 and 4.
...
CORAM : SUNIL P. DESHMUKH AND
ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.
DATE : 11th JANUARY, 2021
2 36 wp 12564.19.odt
ORAL JUDGMENT [ PER SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,J] :-
1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard learned
counsel for appearing parties finally by consent.
2] Aggrieved by communication dated 7th October, 2019
refusing thereunder approval to the appointment of petitioner, he is
before this court under present writ petition questioning its
propriety and validity.
3] It is the case of petitioner, pursuant to advertisement
issued for appointment on a post fallen vacant on retirement of
earlier incumbent, petitioner had applied and had been interviewed
and selected. While the management had submitted proposal for
approval to the petitioner's appointment on the post, same has
been purportedly rejected on 07-10-2019 referring to that, no prior
permission for the advertisement had been sought, sanctioned
staffing pattern had not been annexed to the proposal and further
that the petitioner had not passed the Teachers' Eligibility Test
(hereinafter "TET").
3] While approval had not been granted for aforesaid
reasons, factual position stated in additional affidavit is that prior
permission for advertisement had been sought and it is case of
petitioner that even staffing pattern had been duly submitted
alongwith the proposal. It is referred to that, three chances are
allowed to get through the TET. The petitioner had exhausted only
one chance and subsequently in second attempt, has got through
3 36 wp 12564.19.odt
the same and a certificate to that effect has been filed alongwith
the additional affidavit.
4] In view of aforesaid, it appears to be expedient that the
concerned authority viz. Education Officer would consider the
petitioner's appointment in the light of the facts and circumstances
and if required, even hearing petitioner and management,
including the case of petitioner that he has passed TET within the
prescribed chances. As such, the impugned communication dated
07-10-2019 is set aside, the proposal is revived for re-consideration
by the Education Officer, as referred to above. We hope and trust
that the matter would be decided objectively without being weighed
down by earlier communication dated 7-10-2019. Hopefully
decision would be taken in right earnest within reasonable period,
preferably within a period of three months.
5] Rule made absolute in above terms. Writ petition stands
disposed of.
( ABHAY AHUJA ) ( SUNIL P. DESHMUKH )
JUDGE JUDGE
grt
