[Cites 3, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Ratnamala Kamal Prasoon vs The State Of Maharashra Thro. Education ... on 16 January, 2026
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
TRUPTI
2026:BHC-AS:2484-DB
SADANAND
BAMNE
Digitally signed by
TRUPTI SADANAND
BAMNE
Date: 2026.01.20 916-713-2026.odt
11:08:20 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 713 OF 2026
Ratnamala Kamal Prasoon ... Petitioner
versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents
...
Mr.Nilesh Wable for the Petitioner.
Mr.Aditya R. Deolekar, AGP
Mr.Akshay S. Pansare i/b. Mr.Sachindra B. Shetye for Respondent No.2
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 16, 2026
P.C:
1. Paragraph No. 14 of the judgment delivered by this Court
in Gokul Shrirang Mundhe and Others Versus State of Maharashtra
and Others., (2017) 4 AIR Bom R 431 , cited by the Petitioner
himself, indicates that Section 27 of the Right of Children to Free
and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 provides that teachers teaching
from 1st to 8th standard can be deployed for performing duties
relating to elections to the local authority, the State Legislature, or
Parliament, as the case may be.
Trupti ...1
916-713-2026.odt
2. In paragraph 15, it is recorded that there cannot be any
dispute that the conduct of election is a pious obligation of the State,
and every citizen is required to contribute for the conduct of free and
fair elections. There is no bar for the lecturers of colleges offering
voluntary services. The order of the State Election Commission
deploying employees on election duties would not apply to teachers
of aided and unaided colleges.
3. Paragraphs 14 and 15 in Gokul Shrirang Mundhe and
Others (supra), read as under:
"14. It is true that Section 27 of the Right of Children
to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 suggest
that teachers can be deployed for decennial
population census, disaster relief duties or duties
relating to elections to the local authority or the State
Legislature or Parliament, as the case may be.
However, the provisions of the Right of Children to
free and Compulsory Education Act, would be
applicable to the extent of primary teachers i.e.
teachers teaching from 1st to 8th standard as the said
Act is applicable for primary Schools imparting
elementary education from 1st to 8th standard. The
same would not apply to the teachers of higher
secondary or Colleges.
15. There cannot be any dispute that conduct of
election is a pious obligation of the State and every
citizen is required to contribute for the conduct of free
and fair elections. There is no bar for the lecturers of
Colleges offering voluntary services. In the case of
"Election Commission of India v. St. Mary's School"
Trupti ...2
916-713-2026.odt
((2008) 2 SCC 390: AIR 2008 SC 655) referred to
supra, Order of 1995 issued by the State Election
Commissioner was not the subject-matter of
discussion nor in any of the judgments of the Division
Bench of this Court referred to by the learned counsel
it appears that the order of 1995 was a subject matter
of debate. Considering the aforesaid, it would not be
within the powers of the Respondents to requisition
the teachers of the aided/unaided Colleges for the
purpose of election relying upon Order of 1995 issued
by the State Election Commission. As it is held that
the said order is not applicable to the teachers of
aided/unaided Colleges and they do not come within
the purview of clause (2) of the said Order, needless
to state the other clauses with regard to punishment
etc. would also not apply to them. It appears that the
elections are already over. As the order of 1995 stands
today, it will have to be held that the services of the
teachers of the Colleges cannot be requisitioned for
the election of the Panchayats and Municipalities. As
we have held that the order of 1995 would not
empower the Respondents to requisition the services
of the staff of private aided and unaided Colleges for
the elections of Panchayats and Municipalities. The
other prayers would not survive."
4. The Petitioner admittedly is teaching Standard IV
students, which would fall within the category of primary teachers
teaching from 1st to 8th standard. Section 159 of the Representation
of the People Act,1951 is canvassed. However, the same would not
apply to the present case, as the Petitioner is admittedly teaching
Standard IV students in a primary school and is covered by the
judgment in Gokul Shrirang Mundhe & Ors.(supra).
Trupti ...3
916-713-2026.odt
5. In view of the above, the Writ Petition is dismissed.
(ABHAY J.MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
Trupti ...4
