Disposed

Tushar Vasant Parab v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Bombay HC11 Dec 2024WP/17965/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court held that a proposal for a teacher's appointment flagged with deficiencies was not rejected but issued as a notice to cure. The Management was directed to remove defects within 45 days, resubmit the proposal, and have it decided on merits within 60 days without further fresh objections.

What did the court decide?

Recast impugned order as notice to cure; direct removal of deficiencies within 45 days and merit-based decision within 60 days.

Tushar Vasant Parab vs the State of Maharashtra Thr… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by TRUPTI TRUPTI SADANAND SADANAND BAMNE BAMNE Date: 2024.12.16 12:57:03 +0530

¶2

Trupti 1 33-wp-17965-2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 17965 OF 2024

¶5

Shri Tushar Vasant Parab … Petitioner versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents

¶6

Mr.Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioner. Ms.N.M.Mehra, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 5-State. Mr.Utkarsh Desai for Respondent Nos. 6 and 7.

¶7

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.

¶8

DATE : 11^TH DECEMBER, 2024 P.C.:

¶9

On submission of the proposal for seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner, the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Sindhudurg has pointed out eighteen deficiencies. However, on the one hand, the deficiencies are indicated with the object that the Management would cure the deficiencies. However, on the other hand, the proposal itself is rejected.

¶10

In catena of judgments, we have directed the Management to remove the deficiencies and an updated proposal to be tendered with a further direction to such Education Authorities that they should keep

¶11

Trupti 2 33-wp-17965-2024.odt

¶12

such proposals pending with liberty to the Management to cure the deficiencies, rather than dismissing the proposals.

¶13

In view of the above, this Writ Petition is disposed off with the following directions :

¶14

(a) The impugned order dated 21^st October, 2022 shall not amount to the rejection of the proposal. The same shall be treated by the Management as a notice for removal of deficiencies;

¶15

(b) The deficiencies shall be removed by the Management within a period of 45 days from today;

¶16

¶17

(d) The Education Officer shall consider the proposal

¶18

on its merits and decide the same by passing a reasoned order, within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of the updated proposal.

¶19

Since eighteen deficiencies have been pointed out, we take it that the Education Officer has applied his mind and has pointed out all

¶20

Trupti 3 33-wp-17965-2024.odt

¶21

the deficiencies. No further objections or deficiencies would be raised, save and except, with regards to curing of the deficiencies and the documents tendered along with the updated proposal.

¶22

If the proposal is rejected, the aggrieved party would be at liberty to avail of a remedy, as is permissible in law. If the proposal is favorably considered, the steps for allotment of the Shalarth ID would be initiated expeditiously.

¶23

(ASHWIN D. BHOBE,J.) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

Tushar Vasant Parab v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tushar Vasant Parab v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

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

Mrs. Suvarna Rohit Bhagwat(as a Lhr for Late Mr. Rohit Deepak Bhagwat) vs the President/ Secretary, Jayawant Shikshan Prasarak Mandal and Ors.

Archna Murlidhar Patil and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Khushalbhai Waljibai Makwana vs Western Railway Churchgate and Anr.

Kiran S/O Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors. vs the Union of India Throu.Its Sec. Dept of Justice Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

Raddi Shrishailya Basweshwar vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary School Education Dept. and Ors.

Nijgunayya Renukacharya Hiremath vs the Regional Deputy Director and Ors.