Allowed

Meena Madhavrao Kalkekar v. the Education Officer (Primary), Zp Nanded and Ors.

Bombay HC5 May 2012WP/9903/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This order allows Writ Petition No. 9887 of 2011, setting aside the rejection of the petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak based on surplus teacher availability. It directs the Education Officer to approve the appointment pursuant to the management's proposal.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition is allowed and the Education Officer is directed to accord approval to the petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak.

Meena Madhavrao Kalkekar Vs the Education Officer… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 WP 9885.12

¶2

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 9885 OF 2011 WITH

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 9886 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION NO. 9887 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION NO. 9888 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION NO. 9889 OF 2011 WRIT PETITION NO. 9903 OF 2011

¶6

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court’s or Judge’s orders appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders

¶7

Shri S. R. Choukidar, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri V. S. Panpatte, Advocate for the Respondent No. 3.

¶8

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE : 11th May, 2012.

¶9

PER COURT :

¶10

. The matters are moved for clarification/ modification

¶11

of the order dated 05th May, 2012. This Court had disposed of the group of petitions vide the said common judgment.

¶12

In case of Writ Petition No. 9887 of 2011 the rejection was only on the ground that the surplus teachers are

¶13

2 WP 9885.12

¶14

available. This Court vide the judgment dated 05th May, 2012 had set aside the said order and had directed that the Education Officer shall not reject the proposal on the ground of availability of surplus teachers.

¶15

In other matters, there were other grounds also for rejection of approval, as such the matters are remanded to the Education Officer on other counts. As far as Writ Petition No. 9887 of 2011 is concerned the only ground of rejection of approval by the Education Officer was availability of surplus teachers. As the said ground is set aside the Writ Petition No. 9887 of 2011 deserves to be allowed and is not required to be remanded.

¶16

As such in Writ Petition No. 9887 of 2011 the following order is passed.

¶17

A. The writ petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute.

¶18

B. The Education Officer shall accord approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Shikshan Sevak pursuant to the proposal sent by the management.

¶19

[ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]

¶20

bsb/May 12

¶21

3 WP 9885.12

Meena Madhavrao Kalkekar v. the Education Officer (Primary), Zp Nanded and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Meena Madhavrao Kalkekar v. the Education Officer (Primary), Zp Nanded and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Rajashree Laxmanrao Salve Vs President Shri Vasantrao Naik Shik.Pra.Man.and Ors.

Nandkishor Radhakishan Pardeshi Vs Samarth Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd. and Ors.

Subhash Kalyanrao Lomte Vs Subhadrabai Kalyanrao Lomte and Ors.

Santosh Sandipan Londhe Vs District Dy.Registrar(Co-Op. Societies) Beed and Ors.

Varsha Auto Parts Vs the Shrirampur Peoples Co-Operative Bank Ltd. and Ors.

M/S Omr Bagla Automotive Systems Vs the State of Mah and Anr.