Partly allowed

Sanjay S/O Chintamanrao Bondre v. State of Mah., through Its Secretary, Dept. of Education and 4 Others

Bombay HC25 Mar 2015WP/192/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held that cancelling an appointment approval without a hearing violates natural justice. The impugned order was quashed, and the Education Officer was directed to decide the matter after giving the petitioner an opportunity to be heard.

What did the court decide?

The impugned order was quashed and set aside. The respondent Education Officer was directed to take a decision after hearing the petitioner.

Sanjay S/O Chintamanrao Bondre Vs State of Mah… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

2503wp192.15.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.192/2015

¶5

Sanjay s/o Chintamanrao Bondre ...Versus...

¶6

State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Department of Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 and others

¶7

¶8

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

¶9

¶10

Shri C.B. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for petitioner Shri D.P. Thakare, AGP for respondent nos.1 and 2 Mrs. I.L. Bodade and Shri G.G. Mishra, Advs. for respondent no.3

¶11

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND A.M. BADAR, JJ. DATE : 25.03.2015

¶12

By this petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Nagpur dated 29.12.2014, cancelling the approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Headmaster.

¶13

Inter alia , it is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that the impugned order is liable to be set aside as the approval to the appointment of the petitioner has been cancelled without hearing the petitioner.

¶14

Shri Mishra, the learned Counsel for the respondent no.3 does not dispute that the petitioner was not personally heard. It is, however, stated on behalf of the respondent no.3 that the petitioner had not replied to the show-cause-notice.

¶15

2503wp192.15.odt

¶16

¶17

Since it is well settled that an approval to the appointment of an employee cannot be cancelled without granting an opportunity of hearing to the employee and since in this case the Education Officer has cancelled the approval without hearing the petitioner, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and set aside.

¶18

Hence, for the reasons aforesaid, the writ petition is partly allowed. The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The respondent – Education Officer is directed to take a decision in the matter after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner undertakes to remain present before the Education Officer on 13.04.2015 so that the issuance of notice to the petitioner could be dispensed with.

¶19

Order accordingly. No costs.

¶20

JUDGE JUDGE

¶21

Wadkar

Sanjay S/O Chintamanrao Bondre v. State of Mah., through Its Secretary, Dept. of Education and 4 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sanjay S/O Chintamanrao Bondre v. State of Mah., through Its Secretary, Dept. of Education and 4 Others

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

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke Vs State of Maharshtra Its Secretary Dept. of School Education Mumbai and 3 Others

Mr. Virendra Shankarrao Chopde Vs Director, Social Welfare Directorate, State of Maharashtra, Pune and 4 Others

Vijay S/O Wasudevrao Shende Vs State of Maharashtra, Department of Urban Development Thr. Its Principal Secretary and 2 Others

Shri Sanjay S/O Vasant Sonune Vs State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, Education Department, Mumbai

Hemant Dulichand Giripunje Vs the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad (Secondary), Bhandara and 3 Others

Diwakar S/O Marotrao Chaple Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Department of Education, Mumbai and Others