Bombay High Court
Nilesh Namdev Patil-Gurav vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ... on 20 October, 2021
Bench: R.D. Dhanuka, Abhay Ahuja
9.6905.21-wp+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BASAVRAJ CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
GURAPPA
PATIL
Digitally signed by
WRIT PETITION NO.6905/2021
BASAVRAJ GURAPPA
PATIL
Date: 2021.10.22
10:53:16 +0530
Nilesh Namdev Patil - Gurav ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6906/2021
Vikram Prabhakar Jadhav ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6907/2021
Rohit Sambhaji Kamat ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6908/2021
Sandip Pandit Patil ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6909/2021
Suresh Balaso Khot ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
Basavraj G. Patil 1/4
9.6905.21-wp+.odt
WRIT PETITION NO.6910/2021
Seema Sujit Patil ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6911/2021
Suraj Krishnat Bidkar ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
WRIT PETITION NO.6912/2021
Chaitanya Maruti Patil ..... Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. ..... Respondents
Mr. Chetan G. Patil for the Petitioners
Mrs. P.J.Gavhane, AGP with Ms. K.N.Solunke, AGP, Mrs. S. S.
Bhende, AGP, Mr. N. C. Walimbe, AGP for the State
CORAM: R.D.DHANUKA &
ABHAY AHUJA, JJ.
DATED : OCTOBER 20, 2021
P.C.
1 Mr.Patil, the learned counsel for the Petitioners, on
instructions, seeks liberty to delete Respondent Nos. 4 and
5.
2 Leave to amend is granted. Amendment shall be
carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with.
Basavraj G. Patil 2/4
9.6905.21-wp+.odt
3 Rule.
By consent of the parties, taken up for final disposal.
The learned AGP waives service for Respondent State.
4 By these petitions under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, the Petitioners impugned the order
dated 29.09.2021 passed by the Dy. Director of Education
rejecting the application of the Petitioner to record the
name of each of the Petitioners in the Shalarth Pranali and
refused to issue Shalarth ID in favour of these Petitioners.
5 It is not in dispute that the Education Officer has
already granted approval to the appointment of each of
these Petitioners on the non teaching posts. In our view, the
Dy. Director of Education, thus, could not have refused to
enter the name of the Petitioners in the Shalarth Pranali
and could not have refused to issue Shalarth ID in favour of
these Petitioners. Similar view has been taken by this court
in the past and also today in Writ Petition No.6897/2021
and bunch of petitions. In our view, same judgment would
apply to the facts of theses cases.
6 We, accordingly, pass the following order:
a. The impugned order dated 29.09.2021 passed by
Respondent No.2 - Dy. Director of Education is
quashed and set aside.
b. The Dy. Director of Education is directed to enter
Basavraj G. Patil 3/4
9.6905.21-wp+.odt
the name of each of the Petitioners in Shalarth Pranali
and issue Shalarth ID in favour of the Petitioner
within four weeks from today.
c. The Writ Petitions are allowed in terms of prayer
clauses (a) and (b) and stand disposed of.
d. Rule is made absolute accordingly.
e. Parties to act on an authenticated copy of this
order.
(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) (R.D.DHANUKA, J.)
Basavraj G. Patil 4/4
