Allowed

Rahul Madhavrao Kiwande v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC14 Dec 2021WP/7469/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court bench disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of a teacher's post approval. The court found the rejection erroneous due to available sanctioned posts under 2012-13 and 2013-14 staffing patterns. It quashed the impugned order and directed the Education Officer to reconsider the petitioner's appointment and take a fresh decision within six months.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order quashed; Education Officer directed to reconsider appointment and take fresh decision within six months.

Rahul Madhavrao Kiwande Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2021)

¶1

7469.21WP.odt

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

1071WRIT PETITION NO.7469 OF 2021

¶5

RAHUL MADHAVRAO KIWANDE
VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS

¶7

...

¶8

Mr.D.S. Mali, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.A.R. Kale, AGP for the respondent/State.
Mr.L.H. Kawale, advocate for respondent nos.5 and
6.

¶9

...
 CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA
 AND
 S.G. DIGE, JJ.

¶10

PER COURT :-

¶11

.The proposal seeking approval to the
post of the petitioner is rejected, basically on
the ground that the vacant post was not available
as per the sanctioned staffing pattern of the
year 2013-2014 and there are surplus teachers,
and that, the prior permission is not obtained.

¶12

2.We have heard learned counsel for the
petitioner and the learned A.G.P.

¶13

3.If the staffing pattern of the year
2012-2013 is perused, it shows that one post of
Headmaster, one post of Supervisor and 12 posts
of graduate teachers are admissible. The
seniority list on the said date would show that

¶14

7469.21WP.odt

¶15

¶16

the petitioner is at Sr. No.14. The person at Sr.
No.1 Mr.P.B. Khadbade is Headmaster and person at
Sr. No.2 Mr.U.P. Kiwade is Supervisor, so the
petitioner would certainly at 12th position and
the said post is admissible even as per the
staffing pattern of the year 2012-2013. The
petitioner is appointed in the year 2014. As per
staffing pattern of the year 2013-2014 also the
post is admissible.

¶17

4.In the light of above, it is erroneous
to say that the post was not available. The
petitioner was appointed as against the
sanctioned vacant post. The petitioner is
graduate teacher. The post of graduate teacher
will have to be considered. It also does not
appear that the Education Officer has sent
surplus teachers for absorption in the
institution. Considering the above, we pass the
following order :-

¶18

ORDER

¶19

(i)The impugned order is quashed and set aside.

¶20

(ii) The Education Officer shall reconsider the
proposal seeking approval to the appointment of
the petitioner afresh considering that for the
staffing pattern of the year 2012-2013 and 2013-
2014 the post of graduate teacher is available
and the petitioner was appointed as graduate
teacher.

¶21

7469.21WP.odt

¶22

¶23

(iii)The Education Officer shall follow the
directions issued by this Court from time to time
in the Petitions filed by the petitioner.

¶24

(iv)Fresh decision will be taken preferably
within six months.

¶25

(v)The Writ Petition is disposed of. No
costs.

¶26

(S.G.DIGE, J.)

¶27

 (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

¶28

SGA

Rahul Madhavrao Kiwande v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rahul Madhavrao Kiwande v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kavita Ramesh Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sahil Yashwat Gadage Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Mahesh Sudhakar Bembade Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary and Others

Sundarabai Namdeo Kakade and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dnyaneshwar Nivrutti Talpade Vs Hiraman Chindhu Tayade

Vikas Devrao Deosarkar and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others