Bombay High Court
Wajeed Imtiyaj Tarlekar And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra Thr. Prin. Sec. ... on 30 December, 2023
Author: A.S. Chandurkar
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
2023:BHC-AS:38217-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.11513 OF 2022
1. Wahid Ikram Naikwadi }
Age 23 years, Occupation :Service }
Residing at Naikwadi Building }
High School Road, Miraj, Tal : Miraj }
District Sangli 416 410 }
2. Azad Shikshan Sanstha }
Having its office at 5883 }
Highschool Road, }
Miraj, District : Sangli 416 410 }
through its President/Secretary }
3. Jawahar High School And Junior college }
Having its office at 399/3 }
Shastri Chowk, Jawahar Nagar }
Miraj, District : Sangli 416 410 }
Through its Head Master }..Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra }
Through the Principal Secretary }
Department of School Education }
Having office at Mantralaya, }
Mumbai 400 032 }
2. Deputy Director of Education, }
Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur }
3. Education Officer (Secondary) }
Zilla Parishad, Sangli }Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO.11594 OF 2022
1.Mr.Wajeed Imtiyaj Tarlekar }
1/5
This order is corrected pursuant to order dated 12/12/2023.
corrected11&12-WP-11513-22 and WP-11594-22.doc
Rameshwar Dilwale
Age 29 years, Occupation : Service }
Residing at Guruwar Peth }
Miraj, Tal : Miraj }
District : Sangli 416 410 }
2. Azad Shikshan Sanstha }
Having its office at 5883 }
Highschool Road, }
Miraj, District : Sangli 416 410 }
through its President/Secretary }
3. Jawahar High School And Junior college }
Having its office at 399/3 }
Shastri Chowk, Jawahar Nagar }
Miraj, District : Sangli 416 410 }
Through its Head Master }..Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra }
Through the Principal Secretary }
Department of School Education }
Having office at Mantralaya, }
Mumbai 400 032 }
2. Deputy Director of Education, }
Kolhapur Division, Kolhapur }
3. Education Officer (Secondary) }
Zilla Parishad, Sangli }Respondents
...
Mr. Mandar G. Bagkar for the Petitioners in above both Writ
Petitions.
Mr. S.B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State in WP/11594/2022.
Mr.R.P.Kadam, AGP for the Respondent-State in WP/11513/2022.
...
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR &
FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, JJ
DATE : 30TH NOVEMBER, 2023.
2/5
This order is corrected pursuant to order dated 12/12/2023.
corrected11&12-WP-11513-22 and WP-11594-22.doc
Rameshwar Dilwale
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR,J)
1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. The Petitioner no.1 came to be appointed on the post of
Laboratory Assistant & Junior Clerk on 01/08/2021 and
01/07/2022 respectively with the Petitioner no.3-school. The
proposal for grant of approval came to be rejected by the
Education Officer (Secondary) for the reason that there was a
ban pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 04/05/2020.
4. According to the learned counsel for the Petitioner, though
such ban on recruitment was operating pursuant to Government
Resolution dated 04/05/2020, as observed by the co-ordinate
Bench in its judgment dated 26th April 2023 in Writ Petition (St)
No. 4493/2022 in the matter of Gramvikas Shikshan Mandal
& Others Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Others the post
in question cannot perpetually remain vacant. Since the
Petitioner no.1 was appointed after following the due process of
law, the ban on recruitment could not have been put forth to
refuse consideration of the proposal for grant of approval.
This order is corrected pursuant to order dated 12/12/2023.
corrected11&12-WP-11513-22 and WP-11594-22.doc
Rameshwar Dilwale
5. The learned Assistant Government Pleader has relied upon
the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the Education Officer,
Secondary stating therein that the proposal was rejected only for
that reason.
6. The issue with regard to refusal to grant approval in view of
the ban on recruitment pursuant to Government Resolution
dated 04/05/2020 has been the matter of consideration by this
Court in various Writ Petitions. In the case of Gramvikas
Shikshan Mandal & Ors (supra), this Court has observed that
such posts cannot be permitted to be kept vacant for an
indefinite period. The facts of the present case indicate that the
recruitment has been made on 01/08/2021 and 01/07/2022
respectively, during which time the pandemic situation had
partly subsided. We find in addition that the Petitioner no.3
School is a minority institution and therefore, we deem it
appropriate to direct reconsideration of the proposal seeking
such approval.
7. Accordingly, the following order is passed :
ORDER
This order is corrected pursuant to order dated 12/12/2023.
corrected11&12-WP-11513-22 and WP-11594-22.doc
Rameshwar Dilwale
(i) The order dated 08/07/2022 and 04/08/2022
respectively passed by the Education Officer (Secondary)
refusing to grant approval to the appointment of the
Petitioner no.1 is set aside. The Education Officer
(Secondary) to reconsider the proposal dated 17/05/2022
and 01/08/2022 respectively in accordance with law. He
shall not reject the same by relying upon the Government
Resolution dated 04/05/2020. Necessary decision on said
proposal be taken within period of 8 weeks of providing
copy of this judgment.
(ii) Needless to state that in case the appointment of the
Petitioners is approved, the Deputy Director of Education,
shall take all consequential steps including grant of
Shalarth number in accordance with law.
(iii) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no
order as to costs. Writ petitions are disposed of.
[ FIRDOSH P. POONIWALLA, J] [A.S. CHANDURKAR, J. ]
This order is corrected pursuant to order dated 12/12/2023.
Signed by: Rameshwar L. Dilwale
corrected11&12-WP-11513-22 and WP-11594-22.doc
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Dilwale
Rameshwar
Date: 19/12/2023 09:39:43
