[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Sakshi Sachin Kirve vs The Education Officer (Secondary) ... on 16 January, 2026
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
TRUPTI
2026:BHC-AS:2481-DB
SADANAND
BAMNE
Digitally signed by
TRUPTI SADANAND
BAMNE
Date: 2026.01.20 909 -910 COMMON ORDER.odt
11:08:20 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13669 OF 2025
Sakshi Sachin Kirve ... Petitioner
vs.
The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilha Parishad, Pune & Ors. ... Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 13697 OF 2025
Surekha Sahadu Arote ... Petitioner
vs.
The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilha Parishad, Pune & Ors. ... Respondents
Mr.Rajaram Deshmukh with Mr.Aryan Deshmukh, Mr.Bhushan
Deshmukh, Mr.Vikrant Desai and Ms.Ankita Salvi for the Petitioners
in both the Petitions.
Ms.Priyanka Chavan, AGP for the Respondent -State.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 16, 2026
P.C:
1. In both these Petitions, the identically placed Petitioners
are aggrieved that their transfers from the un-aided establishments
to the 20% aided establishments, under Rule 41 of the Maharashtra
Trupti ...1
909 -910 COMMON ORDER.odt
Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981,
have not been accorded approval by the competent authority only
for the reason that these Petitioners were granted individual
approvals to their appointments on un-aided establishments, in the
"Individual Approval Camp". Such camps were routinely held by the
Education Department.
2. While considering the proposals forwarded by the
Management for approval to the transfers from un-aided
establishments to the 20% aided establishments, the concerned
authority has to verify as to whether the Petitioner, in the first place,
has received an approval to his appointment on un-aided
establishment. If the approval is not in existence, then it would
tantamount to an unauthorized appointment.
3. In both these Petitions, though the photostat copies of
such approvals are placed on record, the authorities who have
maintained the inward and outward registers, do not find that such
approval orders were released after being recorded in the outward
registers. In short, the transmission of these approvals, which should
find a mention in the outward registers, is not found in such
Trupti ...2
909 -910 COMMON ORDER.odt
registers. The outward number on the approval order does not
match with the entries made in the outward registers.
4. This is a peculiar situation. On the one hand, the
Petitioners have approval orders to their appointments made on the
un-aided establishments. On the other hand, the competent
authority is unable to trace out the records pertaining to the issuance
of such approval orders and the transmission to the Management,
which has to be mentioned in the outward registers.
5. The Division Bench of this Court at the Aurangabad
Bench has delivered a judgment in the case of Pramod Prabhakar
Pokale v/s. State of Maharashtra and Others1 concluding that once
an approval is legally granted to the appointment of an employee,
while entertaining a proposal for e.g. for transfer to the aided
establishment or for any other reason including the reason for grant
of Shalarth ID, the approval can not be cancelled. It is only when
the department notices a glaring fraud in the authenticity of such
approval order, that a particular procedure can be followed to deal
with the situation.
1 AIR OnLine 2019 Bom 30.
Trupti ...3
909 -910 COMMON ORDER.odt
6. In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances discussed
above, we find that it would be appropriate to direct the authority
dealing with the proposals with regard to these Petitioners, which
are forwarded by the Management, to verify the approvals granted
to these Petitioners. The Education Officers, who have signed the
orders issuing approvals in the Camps held by the department, shall
also be called upon to make a statement as regards their signatures
on the approval orders. It would be in the interest of justice that the
Management as well as the concerned employees are given an
opportunity of personal hearing in order to find out whether the
authenticity of the approval orders could be questioned.
7. After completing such exercise, if the approvals are found
to be in order, the competent authority can accord its sanction to the
proposal forwarded by the management seeking transfer of these
Petitioners from the un-aided establishments to the partially aided
establishments. If the approval orders are found to be fictitious, a
reasoned order be passed in order to enable the aggrieved party to
assail the said adverse orders. Let this exercise be completed within
a period of 120 days from today. Needless to state, if the Petitioners
Trupti ...4
909 -910 COMMON ORDER.odt
succeed in getting the sanction to their transfers, they would be
entitled for all monetary benefits from the dates of tendering of the
proposals by the management.
8. With the above directions, these Petitions are disposed
off.
(ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
Trupti ...5
