Disposed

Sandesh Suryabhan Wetal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC6 Jul 2022WP/4771/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition sought a direction to the Education Officer to decide a pending proposal for the petitioner's appointment as a Peon on compassionate grounds. The court directed the respondent to decide the proposal in accordance with law by September 15, 2022.

What did the court decide?

Direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the pending proposal of compassionate appointment by 15.09.2022.

Sandesh Suryabhan Wetal Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2022)

WP No.4771/22

SSC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO. 4771 OF 2022

¶6

Sandesh s/o. Suryabhan Wetal

¶7

....Petitioner

¶8

Versus

¶9

The State of Maharashtra and others

¶10

....Respondents

¶11

Mr. Tushar Shinde h/f. Mr. C.K. Shinde, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 and 2.

¶12

CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, C.J. & RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

¶13

DATED : JULY 06, 2022.

¶14

PER COURT :

¶15

The petitioner has put forth prayer clauses ‘B’ and ‘C’

¶16

as under :-

¶17

B) By issue of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature, the respondent no. 2 – The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad may kindly be directed to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Peon (Class IV) in the respondent no. 4 school on compassionate basis.

¶18

C) By issue of writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the like nature, the respondent no. 2 – The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad may kindly be directed to decide the pending proposal seeking approval to the appointment of the petitioner as Peon (Class IV) in the respondent no. 4 school on compassionate basis.

¶19

We have considered the submissions of the learned

¶20

WP No.4771/22

¶21

¶22

advocate for the petitioner and the learned A.G.P. on behalf of respondent nos. 1 and 2. Since a statement is made that the proposal for seeking approval to the compassionate appointment of the petitioner with effect from 1.1.2020 is pending with respondent no. 2 and as respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have no role to play insofar as the grievance of the petitioner is concerned, we have not issued notice to respondent nos. 3 and 4.

¶23

The learned A.G.P. submits that the Education Officer will have to consider the law laid down by this Court in the case of Yogita w/o Shivsing Nikam Vs. State of Maharashtra and others, 2022(2) Mh.L.J. 370 and pass an order on the pending proposal of the petitioner.

¶24

In view of the above, this petition is disposed of with a direction to respondent no. 2 to decide the pending proposal of the petitioner in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible and preferably on or before 15.09.2022.

¶25

[ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]

Sandesh Suryabhan Wetal v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sandesh Suryabhan Wetal 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Shafiq Saleh Mahmad and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Others

Satish Raosaheb Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Anant Baburao Golait Gahilot Vs the State Election Commission of Maharashtra and Others

Adivasi Vikas Vibhag Karmachari Sanghatana Thr Its Project President Nitin Kashinathrao Salunke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Janardhan Rajaram More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sayed Sohel Sayed Mehmood Vs the State of Maharashtra