Dismissed

Rajendra Bhausaheb Chattar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC8 Feb 2023WP/1431/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner approached the High Court seeking quashing of an order rejecting his transfer from an unaided to an aided school and directing salary arbiters. He later also sought quashing of an appointment order and protection against termination. The court noted he did not respond to an advertisement for the vacant post despite qualification differences.

What the court decided

AI extract

Rajendra Bhausaheb Chattar Vs the State of… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

103 WRIT PETITION NO.1431 OF 2023

¶4

RAJENDRA BHAUSAHEB CHATTAR

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS

¶7

Mr.C.V.Thombre, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr.S.G.Sangle, AGP for the respondent/State.

¶8

( CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
 SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.)

¶9

DATE : FEBRUARY 8, 2023

¶10

PER COURT:

¶11

1.The learned Advocate for the petitioner has been entrusted with

¶12

this brief through The High Court Legal Services Authority, Sub Committee,

¶13

Aurangabad.

¶14

2. The petitioner has put forth prayer clause B, C and D as under :-

¶15

"B. By issuing appropriate writ or order, order dated 20.07.2022 passed
by the respondent No.3 rejecting the application of the petitioner for
transfer from unaided to aided school as per the application dated
04.05.2022 may kindly be quashed and set aside and grant approval for
transfer of petitioner from unaided to aided school grant approval for

¶16

khs/Feb.2023/1431

¶17

- 2 -

¶18

transfer and also direct to release the salary of the petitioner with
arrears of salary due and payable to the petitioner.

¶19

C. By issuing appropriate writ or order, the order of appointment of
respondent No.6 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

¶20

D. Pending hearing and final disposal of this petition, respondents may
kindly be directed to not to terminate the service of the petitioner as
Assistant Teacher on the ground of orders passed by the Education
Officer (Secondary) dated 20.07.2022."

¶21

3.The impugned order dated 20.07.2022, indicates that one
Assistant Teacher namely Babaji Jijaba Choudhari passed away on
06.02.2021. He was teaching the 8th to 10th standard students. The
petitioner claims that he has the requisite qualifications to occupy the
vacancy that arose on account of the demise of Shri Choudhari.

¶22

4.The petitioner has acquired the qualification of B.A. B.P.Ed.
(Bachelor of Physical Education). The subject that was being taught by
late Shri Choudhari, was English. The Management published an
advertisement in "Daily Lokmat" calling for applications for selecting a
candidate in place of deceased Choudhari. The petitioner did not apply
pursuant to the said advertisement. The Management took a stand that
the petitioner was a Sports Teacher and though he claims that he can

¶23

khs/Feb.2023/1431

¶24

teach the English subject, Shri Choudhary, was not imparting education
only for the English subject. Shri Choudhari used to teach several
subjects, as per his qualification, for the 8th to 10th standard.

¶25

5.Considering the above and since the petitioner did not respond to
the advertisement, he cannot be considered merely because he feels
that he should be accommodated on the vacancy that has arisen due to
the death of a teacher.

¶26

6. In view of the above, this petition is disposed off.

¶27

7. The fees payable to the learned Advocate for the petitioner are quantified at Rs.2,000/-, which shall be paid by The High Court Legal Services Authority, Sub Committee, Aurangabad.

¶28

 ( SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶29

khs/Feb.2023/1431

Rajendra Bhausaheb Chattar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Rajendra Bhausaheb Chattar v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjay Dhanraj Mahajan Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Jagannath Uttamrao Jadhav Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Shivanand Kashinath Malbhage Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Vithoba Bhau Ghadge Vs State of Maha and Ors.

Suvarna Lakshimanrao Kisve Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Department of High and Technical Education and Others

Deepak Narasayya Ainlod Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Another