Bombay High Court
Ankush Sakharam Chavan And Anr vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr The ... on 14 August, 2024
Author: M. M. Sathaye
Bench: Nitin Jamdar, M. M. Sathaye
2024:BHC-AS:33117-DB
Digitally signed
ANANT by ANANT
KRISHNA NAIK
KRISHNA Date: 8.WP.11217.2024-CD.doc
NAIK 2024.08.19
16:11:32 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11217 OF 2024
Ankush Sakharam Chavan And Anr ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors ...Respondents
Mr. Narendra Bandiwadekar, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Vinayak Kumbhar,
Mr. Rajendra B. Khaire, Mr. Aniket S. Phapale i/b. Ms Ashwini
Bandiwadekar for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. H. Kankal, AGP for the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4-State
CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR &
M. M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATED : 14 AUGUST 2024
P.C.:
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Taken up for final disposal.
2. The Petitioner No. 1, working as a peon with a school run by the
Petitioner No. 2-Education Institute, are jointly challenging the order dated
2 December 2022 passed by the Respondent No. 2-Deputy Director of
Education, Pune Region, Pune. By the said impugned order, the proposal to
include the name of the Petitioner No. 1 in Shalath ID system has been
rejected.
3. Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the Petitioners pointed out
that while passing the impugned order, the approval granted to the
appointment of the Petitioner No. 1 under order dated 11 January 2022
8.WP.11217.2024-CD.doc
issued by the Respondent No. 3-Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla
Parishad, Solapur itself has been canceled. He submitted that the impugned
order is passed after the hearing dated 6 October 2021 conducted by the
Deputy Director. He submitted that perusal of the minutes of the hearing
dated 6 October 2021 does not indicate any case of fraud, misrepresentation
or suppression. He submitted that in absence of these elements, review of
the approval order is not permitted at the stage of entering the name of the
school staff in Shalarth ID. He has relied upon the judgement in this Court
in case of Amol Baban Sangar vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors.1
4. Perused the record. At the stage of entering the name in Shalarth ID
system, the approval to the appointment is considered all over again by the
Education Authority. Learned AGP could not distinguish the facts of the
present case from the case law relied upon by the Petitioners.
5. In a recent case decided by this Court in the matter of Ganesh
Sidhanth Khilare vs. State of Maharashtra and Others 2, we have considered
series of judgments including the judgment relied upon by the Petitioners
and has followed the consistent view that at the stage of entering the name
in the Shalarth ID system, review cannot be taken about the approval order,
in absence of any fraud, misrepresentation or suppression being involved in
the matter. We have time and again clarified that power of review can be
exercised only in cases were fraud, misrepresentation or suppression are
involved.
1 Writ Petition No. 8966 of 2021 dated 21 February 2022
2. 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 960
8.WP.11217.2024-CD.doc
6. In the present case, admittedly no such notice alleging grounds of
fraud, misrepresentation or suppression was given to the Petitioners. The
minutes of the hearing dated 6 October 2021 also does not indicate any
such issue being considered or discussed. The above settled legal position
has been ignored while passing the impugned order and therefore it cannot
be sustained.
7. In that view of the matter the Petition succeeds. The impugned order
dated 2 December 2022 is quashed and set aside. Needless to state that if at
all any case of fraud, misrepresentation or suppression is involved while
granting approval to the Petitioner No. 1 is to be probed, the Respondent
No. 2-Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune will issue notice
giving details to the Petitioners and take appropriate decision thereon after
hearing the Petitioners, within a period of 6 weeks from today.
8. In case no such notice is issued and/or hearing conducted within the
time stipulated it will be presumed that no such case exists and the
Respondent No. 2-Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune shall
enter the name of the Petitioner No. 1 in Shalarth ID system and the
necessary consequential benefits will follow.
9. Writ Petition is disposed of in above terms.
(M. M. SATHAYE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)
