Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Tembhurni through Its President, and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Bombay HC23 Sept 2024WP/2284/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners challenged an order of the Deputy Director of Education dated 13 April 2018 reviewing/modifying approval earlier granted by the Education Officer, affecting appointment as Head of a school. The Court directed the Deputy Director to file an affidavit disclosing the power or Government Resolution under which that order was passed; delay and laches contentions kept open; interim steps sub

What the court decided

AI extract

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Tembhurni through Its… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Husen 1 23 WP-2284-2024.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 2284 OF 2024

¶4

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Tembhurni Through Its President, And Ors. …Petitioners

¶5

Versus

¶6

State Of Maharashtra And Ors. …Respondents

¶7

¶8

Mr. Rahul S. Kadam, for Petitioners. Mr. V.M. Mali, AGP for State/Respondent. Mr. Narendra V. Bandiwadekar, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Vinayak Kumbhar i/b. Ashwini Bandiwadekar, for Respondent No. 4.

¶9

¶10

Digitally signed by HUSENBASHARAHAMAN HUSENBASHARAHAMANNADAF NADAF Date: 2024.02.27 10:26:27 +0530

¶11

CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR & M.M. SATHAYE, JJ. DATE : 22 FEBRUARY 2024

¶12

P.C.:

¶13

. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

¶14

Contention of the Petitioners is that the basis for denying the post of Head of the school to the Petitioner is because of an order passed in favour of Respondent No. 4 by the Deputy Director of the Education on 13 April 2018. According to the Petitioners, this order passed by the Deputy Director amounts to a review of the approval already granted and that too not on proposal of the Management but a letter issued by the head of the school. According to the learned counsel for Respondent No. 4 the Petition suffers from delay and

¶15

Husen 2 23 WP-2284-2024.doc

¶16

latches and there is no illegality in the order of 13 April 2018. However, we note that the order dated 13 April 2018 is an order reviewing/modifying the approval granted by the Education Officer. In various decisions the law regarding the power of the Deputy Director, to do so, has been settled.

¶17

In the light thereof, we direct Respondent No. 2 Deputy Director of Education, Pune to file an affidavit as to under which power tracing to any Government Resolution or policy, that the order dated 13 April 2018 was passed. The contentions of the Respondent No. 4 as regards delay and latches are kept open.

¶18

4. Stand over to 28 March 2024 .

¶19

Any steps taken in the meanwhile will be subject to further orders of this Court.

¶20

( M.M. SATHAYE, J.) ( NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Tembhurni through Its President, and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Shikshan Prasarak Mandal Tembhurni through Its President, and Ors. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Amol Rama Khande vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Secretary and Ors.

Sudarshan Sharad Mohite and Ors. vs the School Education Nd Sport Dept. and Ors.

Neha Nitin Raje vs the Education Officer Z.P Ratnagiri

Aashiya Bi Fakir Mohammad Shaikh vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Principal Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Dasharath S/O Sampatrao Borse vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Principal Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Nasima Bano Allabaksh Hannure vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Principal Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.