Sunita Prakash Patil vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary School Education Department and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sunita Prakash Patil vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary School Education Department and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Directions issued: the impugned order dated 23.10.2023 to be treated as a show cause notice to the Petitioner/Respondent Nos. 4 and 5-Management; Management to submit explanation within two weeks; Respondent No.3 to decide the proposal afresh considering the explanation, within eight weeks of receipt.

Issue for consideration

Whether the rejection of the proposal for approval of the Petitioner's appointment as Shikshan Sevak was sustainable when made solely by citing deficiencies, without affording the Petitioner/Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 an opportunity to submit an explanation or documents and cure the deficiencies.

Court's answer

From perusal of the impugned order dated 23 October 2023, the proposal was rejected by citing the deficiencies without giving the Petitioner/Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 Management an opportunity to submit an explanation/documents and cure the deficiencies.

Ratio / Principle

Since no opportunity was given, the order of 23 October 2023 is to be treated as a show cause notice to the Petitioner/Respondent Nos. 4 and 5-Management.

Key takeaways

The Management is to submit the necessary explanation within two weeks from the date of the order.ratio¶5
On receipt of the explanation, Respondent No.3 is to decide the proposal afresh, taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the Respondent-Management, expeditiously and in any event within eight weeks thereafter.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Approval of appointment as Shikshan Sevak - proposal of Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 for confirmation of Petitioner's appointment rejected by Respondent No.3 by order dated 23.10.2023 citing deficiencies - held that the rejection was made without affording the Petitioner/Respondent Nos. 4 and 5-Management any opportunity to submit an explanation/documents or cure the deficiencies - impugned order directed to be treated as a show cause notice - Management to submit necessary explanation within two weeks - Respondent No.3 to decide the proposal afresh, considering the explanation, expeditiously and within eight weeks thereafter - Writ Petition disposed of in these terms. (Oral order per Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J., Bombay High Court, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur, W.P. No.571 of 2025, decided 08.09.2025.)

44-wp-571-2025.doc

Nikita

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.571 OF 2025

NIKITAKAILASDARADE Digitallysigned byNIKITAKAILASDARADEDate:2025.09.0918:51:07+0530

Sunita Prakash Patil ...Petitioner versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents Mr. Datta H. Pawar for the Petitioner. Mr. S. H. Yadav, AGP for the State.

CORAM : M.S. KARNIK &

SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, JJ.

DATE : 8^th SEPTEMBER, 2025.

ORAL ORDER (Per Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.):

The petition impugns the order dated 23^rd October, 2023 passed by the Respondent No.3 rejecting the Petitioner’s proposal seeking approval to the appointment as Shikshan Sevak with Respondent No.5School. On 28^th October, 2022, the Petitioner participated in the selection process and was selected for the post of Shikshan Sevak in the Respondent No.5-School and joined the services on 14^th November, 2022. On 10^th October, 2023, the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 submitted a proposal for approval to the Respondent No.3 which was rejected by the impugned order dated 23^rd October, 2023.

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the deficiencies which are listed in the impugned order dated 23^rd October, 2023 constituted grounds for rejection of proposal without affording an

1 of 2

44-wp-571-2025.doc

opportunity to the Petitioner/ Respondent No.4 and 5 to submit an explanation and/or cure the deficiencies.

Learned AGP would support the impugned order and submit that in view of the deficiencies listed in the impugned order, the proposal was rightly rejected by the Respondent No.3.

We find from the perusal of the impugned order dated 23^rd October, 2023, that the proposal came to be rejected by citing the deficiencies without giving opportunity to Petitioner/ Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 Management to submit an explanation / documents and cure the deficiencies stated therein.

In light of the same, as there was no opportunity given to the Petitioner/ Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 Management, the order of 23^rd October, 2023 be treated as a show cause notice to the Petitioner/ Respondent Nos. 4 and 5-Management. Let the necessary explanation be submitted by the Management within the period of two weeks from the date of this order.

Upon the receipt of the explanation, the Respondent No.3 to decide the proposal afresh by taking into consideration the explanation submitted by the Respondent-Management, expeditiously and in any event within the period of eight weeks thereafter.

The Writ Petition is disposed off in the above said terms.

2 of 2