Bombay High Court
Baban S/O Waman Thakre And Another vs Deputy Director Of Education, ... on 20 September, 2021
Bench: S.B. Shukre, V. G. Joshi
1 wp1895.21.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1895 OF 2021
1. Baban s/o. Waman Thakre,
Aged about 46 years, Occ. Service,
r/o. Gulhati Layout, Shiv Pratap
Nagar, Washim.
2.Syadwad Education Society Ansing,
Through its President Dharamchandra
Kundlsa Walali, At Post Ansing, Tq.
and District Washim. ........ PETITIONERS
// VERSUS //
1.Deputy Director of Education,
Amravati Division, Tope Nagar,
Amravati - 444 602.
(E-mail : [email protected])
2.Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Washim.
3.Adityakumar s/o. Hukumchand
Walali, Aged about Adult, Occ. Nil,
At Post Ansing, Tq. and District
Washim. ........ RESPONDENTS
::: Uploaded on - 20/09/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 21/09/2021 07:28:36 :::
2 wp1895.21.odt
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mrs.Renu Sirpurkar, Advocate for the petitioners.
Mr.N.R.Patil, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2.
Mr.A.R.Deshpande, Advocate for respondent no.3.
Mr.P.R.Agrawal, Advocate for proposed Intervenor.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE &
VINAY JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 20.9.2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J) :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by
consent.
2. On going through the impugned order dated 4.5.2021, we
find that although hearing has been granted to the Secretary of
Syadwad Education Society, this hearing is actually granted to
respondent no.3, who is said to be Secretary of the Society and who
has made a complaint of making of irregular appointment by the
President of petitioner no.2/Society. As such, the impugned order
does not show that such hearing was granted to the Education Society
as would have been sufficient to show respondent no.1 could have
come to the conclusion that there existed a real dispute amongst the
Office bearers of the Education Society and this dispute was of such a
3 wp1895.21.odt
nature as would impact one way or the other the appointment made
by one faction of the Society. In these circumstances, granting hearing
to the President of the Society was absolutely necessary. It was also
necessary for the respondent no.1 to ascertain as to how many
factions amongst the Office bearers of the Education Society are there
in the Society and whether the policy decisions including the decision
regarding making of appointment to the post of Head Master, are
taken by the recorded Office bearers or not. All these aspects of the
matter, as seen from the impugned order, are ignored completely by
respondent no.1. Therefore, such an order cannot sustain the scrutiny
of law and it must go.
3. The petition is, therefore, allowed. The impugned order is
hereby quashed and set aside. The matter is remanded back to
respondent no.1 for fresh decision in accordance with law, after
granting an opportunity of hearing to both the petitioners,
Complainant and also other Office bearers who are claiming, if any,
that there is a dispute amongst the members of the Society.
The respondent no.1 shall decide the matter within a
period of two weeks from the date of appearance of parties before
him.
4 wp1895.21.odt
Parties shall appear before respondent no.1 on 27 th
September, 2021.
As the intervenor can pursue his cause of action
independently, Civil Application No.786 of 2021 for intervention is
disposed of.
Rule accordingly. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
jaiswal
