Bombay High Court
Sanjay Bapurao Dhanokar And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr. ... on 14 August, 2025
Author: Anil S Kilor
Bench: Anil S. Kilor
2025:BHC-NAG:8055-DB
1014-WP-5274-2017(J).odt 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 5274 OF 2017
1. Sanjay Bapurao Dhanorkar .. PETITIONERS
Aged about 47 years, Occupation-Service,
R/o. Chincholi (Bk.), Tq. Anjangaon (Surji),
District Amravati.
2. Tukaram Zipra Bonde,
Aged about 48 years, Occupation-Service,
R/o. Bonde Plot, Satyadev Furniture Line,
Gadge Nagar, Amravati.
Taluka and District Amravati.
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra, ..RESPONDENTS
through its Secretary, School Education
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Deputy Director of Education,
Amravati Division, Amravati.
Tq. And District Amravati.
3. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Amravati,
District Amravati.
4. Shri Shivaji Education Society,
Through its Secretary,
Shivaji Nagar, Amravati,
Tq. And District Amravati.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. V. A. Kothale, Advocate for petitioners.
Ms Tajwar Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 to 3.
Mr. Abhay Sambre, Advocate for respondent no.4.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM :- ANIL S. KILOR and MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.
DATE :- 14th AUGUST, 2025
ORAL JUDGMENT ( PER ANIL S KILOR, J.)
In the present petition, the petitioners have raised a grievance as
regards cancellation of their appointments made on compassionate
grounds. The Deputy Director of Education, Amravati Division, Amravati,
cancelled the appointments vide order dated 01.07.2017 on the ground
that, at the time of appointments of the petitioners, their age was more
than 40 years. Thus, the appointment were contrary to the Government
Resolution dated 22.08.2005.
2. Mr. Kothale, learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that the
Government Resolution dated 22.08.2005 was subsequently superseded
and the age was increased from 40 to 45 years.
3. It is pointed out that the appointments of the petitioners were made
in the year 2012 with the permission of the Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Amravati and at the time of issuing appointment orders to
the petitioners on compassionate grounds, the Government Resolution
dated 06.12.2010 was in force, which superseded the earlier Government
Resolution dated 22.08.2005, on which reliance has been placed by the
respondent Deputy Director of Education, while cancelling the
appointments of the petitioners.
4. As per Government Resolution dated 06.12.2010 the age limit for
appointments on compassionate ground was increased to 45 years, the
order passed by the Deputy Director of Education, Amravati Division,
Amravati, is illegal and bad in law.
5. On the other hand, Ms Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader,
appearing for the respondents-State, opposed the petition and submits that
the Deputy Director of Education rightly cancelled the appointments of the
petitioners, as the petitioners were more than 40 years of age at the time
of their appointments. She further submits that the Government
Resolution dated 06.12.2010 on which the petitioners are relying, is not
applicable to the petitioners. Accordingly, she prays for dismissal of the
petition.
Mr. Sambre, learned counsel appearing for the respondent no. 4
supports the petition and submits that on the date of appointment of the
petitioners, the maximum age limit for appointment on compassionate
ground was 45 years. As such, there is no error committed in appointing
the petitioners.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the
record, it is evident that the Deputy Director of Education while cancelling
the appointments of the petitioners, has placed reliance on the
Government Resolution dated 22.08.2005.
7. It is further apparent on the face of the record that the
appointments of the petitioners on compassionate ground were made in
the year 2012 and that the Government Resolution dated 22.08.2005 was
superseded by the Government Resolution dated 06.12.2010. This
Government Resolution was in force on the date of appointments of the
petitioners.
8. The Government Resolution dated 06.12.2010 prescribes the
maximum age limit of 45 years for appointment on compassionate ground.
9. There is no dispute that the School where the appointments of the
petitioners were made is grant-in-aid school. There is no dispute about the
policy of the government for appointments on compassionate ground is
applicable to the aided schools. Therefore, we have no hesitation to hold
that the Government Resolution dated 06.12.2010 is applicable to the
petitioners.
10. As such, the reasons recorded by the Deputy Director of Education
while cancelling the appointments of the petitioners are erroneous and not
sustainable in the eyes of law.
11. Accordingly, we pass the following order:
(i) The writ petition is allowed.
(ii) The impugned order dated 01.07.2017 passed by the Deputy
Director of Education, Amravati Division, Amravati, is hereby
quashed and set aside.
12. Rule is made absolute. There shall be no order as to costs.
(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)
Andurkar.
Signed by: Jayant S. Andurkar
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 15/08/2025 09:28:02
