Bombay High Court
V. B. Dumbre @ Jyoti Jaydas Dangat vs Chairman / Secretary Subhash ... on 23 November, 2021
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, Abhay Ahuja
17. WP 4764-21.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 4764 OF 2021
V. B. Dumbre @ Jyoti Jaydes Dangat ... Petitioner
Versus
Chairman / Secretary
Subhash Vidya Mandal, Pimpalwandi & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3727 OF 2021
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3729 OF 2021
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3728 OF 2021
The President Secretary Subhash Vidya Mandir ... Petitioner
Versus
The Education Officer (Secondary) & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 3726 OF 2021
The Chairman/ Secretary Subhash Vidya Mandir ... Petitioner
Versus
The Education Officer (Secondary) & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4765 OF 2021
Sanjay Raosaheb Unde ... Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman/ Secretary Subhash
Vidya Mandir & Ors. ... Respondents
Nikita Gadgil 1 of 5
17. WP 4764-21.doc
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4763 OF 2021
Mangal A. Dukare @
Mangal G. Gadage ... Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman/ Secretary Subhash
Vidya Mandir & Ors. ... Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 4766 OF 2021
Anita B. Matale @ Anita R Kakade ... Petitioner
Versus
The Chairman/ Secretary Subhash
Vidya Mandir & Ors. ... Respondents
******
Mr. Mandar Limaye with Ms. Kettaki Karale, Advocates for
Petitioner in WPs 4764/21, 4763/21, 4765/21 and 4766/21.
Mr. Sarang S. Aradhye, Advocate for Petitioners in WPs 3726/21
to 2729/21.
Mrs. P. J. Gavhane, AGP for State in WPs 4764/21, 3727/21 and
3729/21.
Mr. N. K. Rajpurohit, AGP for State in WP 3726/21.
Mrs. P. N. Diwan, AGP for State in WP 3728/21.
Ms. S. S. Bhende, AGP for State in WP 4765/21.
Ms. V. M. Mali, AGP for State in WP 4763/21.
Mr. N. C. Walimbe, AGP for State in WP 4766/21.
******
CORAM: R. D. DHANUKA AND
ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.
DATE : 23RD NOVEMBER, 2021
P.C. :-
1. Rule.
Learned AGPs waive service on behalf of the respondents.
By consent of the parties petition is heard finally.
Nikita Gadgil 2 of 5
17. WP 4764-21.doc
2. By these petitions either filed by the teachers or by the
management raised a common issue whether the Deputy
Director of Education did have jurisdiction to pass the impugned
order dated 9th December 2020 setting aside the order of
approval granted to the teachers on the grounds raised in the
petition.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner invited our
attention to the impugned order passed by the Deputy Director
of Education and also the show cause notice issued by him in
this regard. He also placed reliance on the judgment of this
Court dated 30th March 2021 in case of Ansari Amina Mujhar
Ali Vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. in Writ Petition No.
1380/2019 and other companion writ petitions and submitted
that in this case admittedly there were no allegations of fraud,
suppression and misrepresentation on the part of the teachers
or the management and thus, Deputy Director of Education
could not have exercised any powers of setting aside the orders
passed by the Education Officer under the Resolution dated 23 rd
August 2017 granting approval to the appointment of the
petitioner.
Nikita Gadgil 3 of 5
17. WP 4764-21.doc
4. Learned AGP appearing for the State could not distinguish
the said judgment delivered by this Court in case of Ansari
Muzhar (supra). This Court in a recent judgment delivered on
16th November 2021 in case of Bhushan Vikas Gawad Vs. State
of Maharashtra and Ors. in Writ petition no.1491/21 and
companion writ petitions, after adverting the said judgment
dated 30th March 2021 delivered by this Court in case of Ansari
(supra) has taken the identical view.
5. In our view the said judgments in case of Ansari (supra)
and in case of Bhushan Vikas Gawad (supra) would apply to the
facts of this case. We do not propose to take a different view in
this matter. In our view since there are no allegations of fraud,
suppression and misrepresentation in the show cause notice
issued by the Deputy Director of Education, even if the Deputy
Director of Education have the limited powers of review of the
order passed by the Education Officer under Resolution dated
23rd August 2017, order of the Education Officer cannot be set
aside on the ground of irregularity. Since no such grounds are
mentioned in the show cause notice and consequentially in the
impugned order, the said order is quashed and set aside being
Nikita Gadgil 4 of 5
17. WP 4764-21.doc
contrary to the principles of law laid down by this Court in the
aforesaid two judgments.
6. We accordingly pass the following order:-
(i) Writ Petitions are allowed in terms of prayer clause (a) and
(b).
(ii) The consequential benefit, if any, due the petitioner on the
approval granted by the Education Officer shall be paid to the
teachers/petitioners within six weeks from today.
(iii) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms.
(iv) No order as to costs
(v) Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of this order.
[ABHAY AHUJA, J.] [R. D. DHANUKA, J.]
Digitally signed
by NIKITA
NIKITA YOGESH
YOGESH GADGIL
Date:
GADGIL 2021.11.24
18:02:13 +0530
Nikita Gadgil 5 of 5
