Parshuram Krushna Gaikwad vs The State Of Maharashtra Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 10801 Bom

2023:BHC-AUG:22562-DB
                                                                                     962.WP.490.23.odt


                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                       BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                         WRIT PETITION NO.490 OF 2023

                      Parshuram s/o Krushna Gaikwad                ...     PETITIONER
                             VERSUS
             1.       The State of Maharashtra,
                      through the Secretary
                      School Education and Sports
                      Department, Mantralaya Mumbai
             2.       The Education Officer (Sec.)
                      Zilla Parishad, Beed.
             3.       The Head Master
                      Vinayak Higher Secondary School,
                      Peth Beed, Tq. and Dist. Beed                ...     RESPONDENTS
                                                    ...
                                Advocate for Applicant : Mr. Basarkar Anil P.
                           AGP for Respondent /State : Mr. S.R. Yadav - Lonikar
                              Advocate for respondent No.3 : Mr. V.S. Kadam
                                                    ...
                                      CORAM               : MANGESH S. PATIL &
                                                             SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 18.10.2023

ORDER : (SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.)

Heard learned counsel for both the sides.

2. The petitioner is challenging the communication dated

25.11.2022 issued by the respondent No.2 - Education Officer rejecting

the proposal for correction in the school record.

3. The petitioner has sought correction in the school record to

the extent of caste. His caste was wrongly recorded as 'Takari' which

should have been 'Wadari'. Therefore application was submitted to the

962.WP.490.23.odt

respondent No.3 - School. It was forwarded to the Education Officer by

letter dated 14.11.2022. By impugned communication it was rejected

only on the ground that the petitioner ceased to be the student of the

school concerned and as per provisions of Rule 26.4 of the Secondary

School Code, 1977 it was not permissible to correct the record.

4. In view of the judgment rendered by full bench in the matter

of Janabai d/o. Himmatrao Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.;

2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 the reason cited by the Education Officer is

unsustainable. The Education Officer has to reconsider the claim of the

petitioner as per Rule 26.4 of the Secondary School Code,1977 as well as

the parameters laid down in the matter of Janabai d/o. Himmatrao

Thakur (supra).

5. We, therefore, dispose of this writ petition by directing the

respondent No.2 - Education Officer to reconsider the proposal and take

a decision afresh on its own merits. The communication dated

25.11.2022 is quashed. The respondent No.2 shall decide the proposal

within six weeks.

6. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

( SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.) (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.)

habeeb