Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 10412 Bom
Judgement Date : 9 October, 2023
2023:BHC-AUG:21744-DB
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
13 WRIT PETITION NO. 8533 OF 2021
Dhananjay Fulchand Khomane,
Age. 18 years, Occu. Student,
R/o. Near Bhosle Vidhyalay Jikthan,
Tal. Gangapur, Dist. Aurangabad. ....Petitioner
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through Secretary School Education
and Sports Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad.
3. Maharashtra State Board of Secondary
and Higher Secondary Education,
Aurangabad Divisional Board,
Station Road, Osmanpura, Aurangabad,
Through its Divisional Secretary.
4. Orchid Techno School,
Pl.No.14/40, Cidco,
Waluj Mahanagar, Dist. Aurangabad.
Through its Head Master ....Respondents
...
Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Kale G.D.
AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 : Mr. S.R. Yadav-Lonikar
Advocate for Respondent No. 3 : Ms. N.D. Patil h/f. Ms. S.P. Mahajan
...
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
DATE : 09 OCTOBER 2023
JUDGMENT :
Heard both the sides finally. Rule.
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the
respondent no. 3 - Board, dated 02 November 2022, refusing to
correct the certificate and marks memo issued pursuant to the order
passed by the Education Officer in exercise of the powers under the
clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code. The reason being assigned
is questioning the legality of the correction made by the school in the
original record pursuant to the order of the Education Officer, and by
referring to Rule 59 (3) of the Maharashtra Secondary and Higher
Secondary Education Boards Regulations, 1977 (for short 'the
Regulation of 1977').
3. Having heard both the sides, it would be suffice to observe
that the issues being raised by the respondent no. 3 - Board, are no
more res integra, in view of the decision of this Court in the matter of
Achari Abhijeet Mohanan Versus The State of Maharashtra and others,
in Writ Petition No. 1254/2021, dated 07 September 2022, to which one
of us (Mangesh S. Patil, J.) was a member.
4. It has been specifically laid down that once the Education
Officer passes an order under clause 26.4 of the Secondary School
Code, and the school record is corrected, the board has no power and
jurisdiction to question it by resorting to Rule 59 (3) of the Regulation of
1977.
5. When admittedly, the original school record has been
corrected pursuant to the order of Education Officer passed under
clause 26.4 of Secondary School Code, the board is legally obliged to
follow the course.
6. The writ petition is allowed. The impugned order is
quashed and set aside. The respondent no. 3 - Board shall, in
accordance with the order passed by the Education Officer and the
corrected school record, issue fresh mark memo and passing
certificate to the petitioner as expeditiously as possible and in any case
within a period of three weeks.
7. Rule is made absolute in above terms.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ]
spc/
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!