Dismissed

Jayshree Yashwant Ghankute v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC20 Nov 2019CP/183/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held the Education Officer complied with directions by issuing a communication denying promotion due to lack of power. The dismissal of the Contempt Petition was upheld. Liberty to challenge the communication via appropriate proceedings was granted.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner granted liberty to file appropriate proceedings against the communication dated 4.2.2019.

Jayshree Yashwant Ghankute Vs the State of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

{1}

¶2

cp 183.19.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

930 CONT. PETITION NO.183 OF 2019 IN WP/7052/2015

¶5

JAYSHREE YASHWANT GHANKUTE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶6

... Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Bedre Vinayak Sudhakar AGP for Respondents:Mr.K.N. Lokhande

¶7

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ .

¶8

Date: November 20, 2019...

¶9

PER COURT :-

¶10

1 This Court, in Writ Petition No.7052 of 2015, directed the Education Officer to call for the proposal from the management, with regard to the post of Head Mistress from the ST category candidate, within a period of two months and in spite of communication, if the proposal is not received, shall take further steps as per the letter dated 6.3.2010. The said order was passed by this Court in view of the anomalous situation created in the school because of dispute in the management.

¶11

2 After the said order was passed, though the Education Officer called for the proposal from the management, the management did not submit any proposal to the Education Officer and therefore, as per the directions of this Court, the Education Officer proceeded further in the matter and issued a communication on 4.2.2019. In the said communication, the

¶12

{2}

¶13

cp 183.19.odt

¶14

Education Officer expressed his inability to grant promotion to the petitioner, in view of the fact that he does not possess any power to promote the petitioner as per the letter dated 6.3.2010. The petitioner acknowledged the receipt of the said letter and it is annexed with the contempt petition.

¶15

3 In view of the said communication dated 4.2.2019, we are satisfied that the compliance of the directions of this Court is made by the Education Officer. As far as the legality of the said communication is concerned, a remedy is available to challenge the same, if the petitioner so desires. Accordingly, the present Contempt Petition is disposed of.

¶16

4 At this stage, the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks liberty to file appropriate proceedings against the communication dated 4.2.2019. The liberty is granted, as prayed by the petitioner.

¶17

(ANIL S. KILOR, J) (PRASANNA B. VARALE J) .

¶18

vbd

Jayshree Yashwant Ghankute v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jayshree Yashwant Ghankute v. the State of Maharashtra and 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

Vijaysing Nathesing Rajput Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Swati Gopalrao Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sanjay Prasad Biradar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Afshan Anjum Mahammad Farid through Father Mahammad Farid Mahamad Husain Vs Pawan Vishnudas Chandak

Nilavati Dagdu Jadhav Vs the Housing Development Finance Co. Ltd, Mumbai

Shashikala Dodhu Sonawane Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others