Santosh Jagannath Bahrat v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC4 Sept 2025WP/10820/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Couple convenience; special category II; transfer policy; Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024; clause 1.9; clause 4.3; clause 5.6; clause 5.10; Zilla Parishad teachers; mid-term transfer; transfer orders dated 21.08.2025 and 22.08.2025; transfers beyond 31.05.2025 window; status quo; interim relief; notice returnable 03.10.2025; alternative remedy; grievance redressal mechanism; reply affidavits; Principal Seat; Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench; writ petitions 2025.

What did the court decide?

Interim relief: notice issued, returnable on 03.10.2025, with the learned Addl.GP/AGPs and counsel for Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar waiving notice; in the meanwhile and till the next date of listing, status quo as on today to be maintained. ¶¶72

Santosh Jagannath Bahrat vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶¶72

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners - Zilla Parishad teachers served with transfer orders dated 21.08.2025 and 22.08.2025 - are entitled to treatment in special category 'II' under the couple convenience policy, per clause 1.9 read with clause 4.3 and their sub-clauses of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024. +2 more

¶¶60

Court's answer

A view on the couple convenience claim of the petitioners will be taken after the necessary documents are placed before the Court.

¶¶71

Ratio / Principle

A prima facie case is made out by the petitioners: the impugned transfer orders were issued much beyond 31.05.2025 with no specific reason or contingency recorded warranting mid-term transfers; accordingly the petitions are to be considered and an interim order of status quo as on today is directed.

¶¶66

Key takeaways

The respondents' objection founded on the alternative remedy of the clause 5.10 grievance redressal mechanism is not decided at the threshold; it can be considered after the respondents file their reply affidavits so that the entire relevant material is before the Court.ratio¶¶71

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench (Manish Pitale and Y. G. Khobragade, JJ., per court, 04.09.2025): Bunch of eight writ petitions by teachers in Zilla Parishad schools challenging transfer orders dated 21.08.2025 and 22.08.2025. Common grievances: (i) deprivation of the couple convenience policy - special category 'II' under clause 1.9 read with clause 4.3 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024; and (ii) transfers effected on 21.08.2025/22.08.2025, well beyond the 01-May to 31-May window prescribed by clause 5.6, with no specific contingency recorded in the impugned orders. The Court found a prima facie case on the mid-term transfer point, issued notice returnable on 03.10.2025 and directed interim status quo as on today till the next date, noting that in similar matters by similarly situated Zilla Parishad employees the Principal Seat had granted status quo. The State's objection based on the alternative remedy of the clause 5.10 grievance redressal mechanism was left open for consideration after reply affidavits; the couple convenience claim is to be examined after necessary documents are placed on record. Interlocutory order only; no final adjudication.

¶1

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

954 WRIT PETITION NO. 10791 OF 2025

¶4

VANDANA ABASAHEB SARWADE AND OTHERS

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPLE SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶7

AND

¶8

957 WRIT PETITION NO. 10826 OF 2025

¶9

SUPRABHA SHIVAJIRAO SARWADE AND OTHERS

¶10

VERSUS

¶11

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPLE SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶12

AND

¶13

975 WRIT PETITION NO. 9922 OF 2025

¶14

MINAKSHI SHIVAJI NIKAM AND OTHERS

¶15

VERSUS

¶16

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶17

WITH

¶18

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9315 OF 2025

¶19

¶20

WRIT PETITION NO. 9922 OF 2025

¶21

AND

¶22

996 WRIT PETITION NO. 10797 OF 2025

¶23

TARACHAND LAXMAN PARANDE AND OTHERS

¶24

VERSUS

¶25

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

¶26

THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

AND

1/6

Jhs/

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶31

1005 WRIT PETITION NO. 10815 OF 2025

¶32

MEERA VASANT MULE VERSUS

¶33

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶34

AND

¶35

1007 WRIT PETITION NO. 10817 OF 2025

¶36

SHAIKH FIRDOS JABEEN MOHAMMAD MOINODDING VERSUS

¶37

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

¶38

AND

¶39

1009 WRIT PETITION NO. 10819 OF 2025

¶40

RUBINABANO YUNUSKHAN PATHAN

¶41

VERSUS

¶42

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶43

AND

¶44

1010 WRIT PETITION NO. 10820 OF 2025

¶45

SANTOSH JAGANNATH BAHRAT

¶46

VERSUS

¶47

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

¶48

Mr. Biradar Ramrao Dhondiram, Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/10791/2025, WP/10826/2025.

¶49

Adv. K. D. Pote, h/f. Mr. A. G. Ambetkar, Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/10797/2025.

¶50

Mr. S. G. Munde, Advocate for the Petitioners in WP/9922/2025, WP/10815/2025, WP/10817/2025, WP/10819/2025, WP/10820/2025.

¶51

Mr. S. K. Tambe, Addl. GP, Ms. S. S. Joshi, Mr. V. M. Chate, Mr. V. M. Kagne, Mr. S. V. Hange, AGPs for Respondents-State Authorities.

¶52

2/6

¶53

Jhs/

¶54

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶55

Mr. S. R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4/Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar in WP/9922/2025.

¶56

Ms. S. B. Pethkar, Advocate h/f. Ms. V. A. Shinde, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4/ Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar in WP/10815/2025, WP/10817/2025, WP/10819/2025, WP/10820/2025.

¶57

CORAM : MANISH PITALE AND Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

¶58

DATE : 04.09.2025

¶59

PER COURT :

¶60

These are bunch of petitions filed by the petitioners, who are working as teachers in various Zilla Parishad schools. These pertain to Zilla Parishad of various districts and all the petitioners are aggrieved by impugned transfer orders. The documents on record show that the petitioners in these petitions have been transferred by orders dated 21.08.2025 and 22.08.2025. Apart from other issues raised in these petitions, a common thread in these petitions pertains to what is termed as the policy of couple convenience under the transfer policy as per the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024. The petitioners herein claim that they are entitled to be treated in special category – ‘II’ as per clause 1.9 and its various sub clauses of the said Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, read with clause 4.3 and various sub clauses thereof.

¶61

3/6

¶62

Jhs/

¶63

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶64

After having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, we find that various grievances are raised in the present petitions while challenging the impugned transfer orders, including the claim of the petitioners that they have been deprived of the policy of couple convenience under the aforesaid clauses of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024.

¶65

Apart from the aforementioned contention pertaining to the policy of the couple convenience, the other issue raised in the present petition pertains to clause 5.6 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, which stipulates that ordinarily such transfers of Zilla Parishad employees shall be undertaken only once between 01-May to 31-May. It is an admitted position that in the case of all the petitioners in these petitions, the transfer orders have been issued on 21.08.2025 and 22.08.2025, which is much beyond 31.05.2025.

¶66

There is no specific reason recorded in the impugned transfer orders indicating any specific contingency or circumstances warranting issuance of such transfer orders, which can be said to be mid term. To that extent, we are inclined to hold that a prima facie case is made out by the petitioners in their favour to consider the present petitions and in the meanwhile to direct an order of status quo as on today.

¶67

4/6

¶68

Jhs/

¶69

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶70

It is relevant to note that in the case of similarly situated employees of the Zilla Parishads, wherein similar grounds have been raised at the Principal Seat of this High Court, orders of status quo have been granted and the petitions are pending consideration.

¶71

The learned AGPs appearing in these petitions rely upon clause 5.10 and its sub-clauses to contend that an appropriate grievance redressal mechanism is provided under the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024 and in view of the alternative remedy, the present petition ought not to be entertained. We are of the opinion that such an objection can be considered after the respondents file their reply affidavits so that the entire relevant material is before this Court to examine the contentions raised on behalf of the petitioners. We are of the opinion that after necessary documents are placed before this Court, a view can be taken with regard to the aspect of couple convenience raised on behalf of the petitioners in these petitions.

¶72

In view of the above, issue notice, returnable on 03.10.2025 . The learned Addl.GP and AGPs waive notice on behalf of respondent – the State Authorities. Mr. Dheple, learned advocate waives notice on behalf of respondent Nos. 3 and 4/Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar in WP/9922/2025. Ms. Pethkar, Advocate holding for Ms. V. A. Shinde, Advocate waives notice on behalf of respondent –

¶73

5/6

¶74

Jhs/

¶75

954 WP-10791- 2025 & Ors

¶76

Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar in in WP/10815/2025,

¶77

WP/10817/2025, WP/10819/2025, WP/10820/2025.

¶78