Bombay High Court
Mr. Ganesh Maruti Kamble vs State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 16 March, 2021
Bench: Nitin Jamdar, C.V. Bhadang
rsk 1/3 45-WP-111-21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.111 OF 2021
Ganesh Maruti Kamble ...Petitioner
Versusa
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. Chetan G. Patil for the Petitioner.
Mrs. P. N. Diwan, AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR &
C. V. BHADANG, JJ.
DATE : 16 MARCH 2021.
P.C. :
. The Petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the
Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, Kolhapur dated 25 June 2018
refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the Petitioner dated 23
October 2014 on the post of Junior clerk.
2. Respondent-Management issued an advertisement in the
newspaper on 7 August 2014 calling for applications for appointment
to the post of Junior Clerk. The Petitioner was found suitable and was
appointed on 30 August 2014. The Respondent-Management sent the
proposal of the Petitioner to the Education Officer-Respondent No.2
for approval. The Education Officer by impugned order dated 25 June
rsk 2/3 45-WP-111-21.doc
2018 rejected the proposal.
3. Heard Mr. Chetan Patil, learned Counsel for the Petitioner
and Mrs. P. N. Diwan, learned AGP for the Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
4. The rejection of approval of Petitioner's appointment is
based on Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015 read with
Government Resolution dated 23 October 2013 referring to the
staffing pattern and embargo on the fresh appointment. The Education
Officer has observed in the impugned order that as per Government
Resolution dated 12 February 2015 till a Committee is established to
review the staffing pattern as per Government Resolution dated 23
October 2013 no fresh appointment be made and on that ground
approval cannot be granted.
5. Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submitted that the
Petitioner was appointed on 23 October 2014 which is before to the
Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015 and therefore this
embargo will not apply to the appointment of the Petitioner. Reliance
is placed on the judgment and order passed by Division Bench of this
Court in Writ Petition No.3525 of 2019 dated 19 January 2021
(Coram: S. C. Gupte and Surendra P. Tavade, JJ.)
6. Perusal of the Government Resolution dated 12 February
2015 shows that the Government Resolution refers to earlier
rsk 3/3 45-WP-111-21.doc
Resolution dated 23 October 2013 and decision to establish a
committee to review staffing pattern. The Government Resolution
dated 12 February 2015 simply states that till the Committee as per
Government Resolution dated 23 October 2013 submits its report
further appointment should not be made. This Government Resolution
dated 23 October 2013 itself does not contain any specific embargo.
Plain language in the Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015
shows that embargo has been brought into force post 12 February
2015. Therefore the embargo cannot be applied prior to 12 February
2015. The appointment of the Petitioner being of 23 October 2014,
the ground for rejection of the Petitioner's approval therefore cannot be
sustained.
7. Accordingly the impugned order dated 25 June 2018 is
quashed and set aside. The proposal of the Respondent-Management in
respect of approval to Petitioner's appointment is restored to the file of
Respondent-Education Officer who will decide the same as per law after
scrutinizing all relevant facts, except the one which we have decided in
this order. The decision be taken within 8 weeks from the date the
order reaches the Education Officer.
8. The Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms.
(C.V. BHADANG, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)
Digitally
signed by
R.S. R.S. Karve
Date:
Karve 2021.03.19
17:37:15
+0530
