On a Writ Petition seeking directions to the Education Officer to withhold approval for six teacher appointments, the Court held that it could not be entertained as the petitioner had an individual grievance pending before the School Tribunal concerning his own termination.
Petition stands rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
3799.16WP
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3799 OF 2016 DANISH ALAM SHAIKH GULAM HUSAIN
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Biradar R.D.
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. B.V. Virdhe
...
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. Dated: April 04, 2016
...
PER COURT :-
Heard.
2.The petitioner has filed this Writ
Petition under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, seeking directions to
the Respondent - Education Officer not to
accord the approval to the appointment to six
candidates in view of the Government
Resolution dated 2nd May, 2012. Admittedly,
the petitioner has filed appeal before the
School Tribunal, which is pending for
consideration. It is the case of the
petitioner that, the petitioner was appointed
in the year 2009 as Assistant Teacher and
illegally his services have been terminated
in the year 2012. If the petitioner has any
grievance, restricting to his interest, the
3799.16WP
2
petitioner could have sought directions from
the School Tribunal for keeping one post
vacant. However, by way of filing this Writ
Petition, the petitioner is seeking
directions to the Respondent - Education
officer, not to accord approval to six
teachers, who are not before us.
3.In our opinion, such Petition cannot
be considered when the petitioner himself is
interested and his appeal is pending before
the School Tribunal. However, we hope and
trust that, while according sanction to the
services of six teachers, who have been
appointed by the respondents, concerned
Education Officer by keeping in view the
relevant rules and regulations shall take
appropriate decision. We make it clear that,
we have not expressed any opinion on this
aspect.
4.With the above observations, we do
not see any reason to entertain the Petition.
Hence the Petition stands rejected.
SGA
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a writ petition under Article 226 can be entertained when the petitioner has an individual grievance pending before the School Tribunal regarding termination of services.
Whether the petitioner can seek directions to the Education Officer not to accord approval to six teachers' appointments while being litigiously interested in the matter.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
DANISH ALAM SHAIKH GULAM HUSAIN
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
S.S. SHINDE
SANGITRAO S. PATIL
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court