Jijimol Samraj vs the State of Maharashtra Thr the Sec. School Edu. and Sports Dept. and Ors.

¶1

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 10104 OF 2025

¶4

VINA ARVIND KHADPE

¶5

Digitally signed by VINA ARVIND KHADPE Date: 2026.01.28 11:36:53 +0530

¶6

Jijimol Samraj, Age: 37 years, Occ. Service, R/o Samraj Dhasian, C/2, Gopal Vihar, Laxman Mhatre Road, Near Shagun Hotel, Navagaon, Dahisar (West), Mumbai. ….Petitioner Versus

¶7

The State of Maharashtra, Through the Secretary, School Education and Sports Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-400 032

¶8

The Commissioner of Education School Education Department, Maharashtra State, Pune.

¶9

The Director of Education, (Secondary and Higher Secondary), Maharashtra State, Pune-1.

¶10

The Deputy Director of Education, Mumbai Region, Mumbai, Having Office at, Jawahar Balbhawan Netaji Subhash Road, Charni Road, Mumbai - 400 004.

¶11

The Education Inspector (West Zone) Brihanmumbai, Having office at, Ismail Yusuf College Compound, Jogeshwari (East), Mumbai.

¶12

Society of Franciscan Brothers, Mount Poinsur, S.V.P. Road, Borivli (West), Mumbai -400 103, Through President/Secretary/Trustee.

¶13

1 of 7

¶14

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶15

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶16

St. Francis D'Assisi High School Mount Poinsur, S.V.P. Road, Borivali (West), Mumbai -400 103, Through its Principal/Head Mistress ….Respondents

¶17

Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. Akhil Kupade i/b Mr. Utkarsh Desai, Advocate for Respondent No. 6.

¶18

Mrs. Nisha Mehra, AGP for the Respondent -State.

¶19

CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.

¶20

DATE : 20^th JANUARY, 2026

¶21

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per: Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.)

¶22

By the present Petition, the Petitioner assails the order

¶23

dated 27.07.2020 passed by the Respondent No. 5 Education Officer, rejecting the proposal for individual approval to the appointment of the Petitioner made by Respondent No. 6 Educational Institution on the post of Junior Clerk at the Respondent No. 7 Secondary School.

¶24

Petitioner has completed her graduation in B.Sc. MCA and has also passed MS-CIT Examination. Respondent No. 6 is a Christian Minority Educational Institution. Vacancy to the post of Junior Clerk arose on account of sanctioning of two additional posts of Junior Clerks, by the office of Respondent No. 5 for the

¶25

2 of 7

¶26

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶27

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶28

Academic Year 2018–2019 as per new norms of staffing pattern provided vide G.R. dated 28.01.2029. Respondent No. 6 issued an advertisement on 11.12.2019 in the daily newspapers ‘The Indian Express’ and ‘Loksatta’ inviting applications from eligible candidates for the post of Junior Clerk at Respondent No. 7 School.

¶29

The Petitioner applied for the said post. In the interviews held on 23.12.2019, he was selected, upon being found to be eligible and meritorious. He was appointed as Junior Clerk by Respondent No. 7 School, on 27.12.2019.

¶30

On 01.02.2020, the Head Master of Respondent No. 7 School submitted proposal along with requisite documents in the office of Respondent No. 5, seeking individual approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the post of Junior Clerk.

¶31

By order dated 27.07.2020, Respondent No. 5 has rejected the said proposal submitted by Respondent No. 7. Ground for rejection of the proposal is that appointment of the Petitioner was made before the allotment of post by the Education Director, as per the Government Resolution dated 07.03.2019.

¶32

The Petitioner is before this Court challenging the order

¶33

3 of 7

¶34

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶35

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶36

dated 27.07.2020 passed by Respondent No. 5, and for a further direction to Respondent No. 5 to grant individual approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the post of Junior Clerk and for allotment of Shalarth ID.

¶37

Respondent No. 5 has opposed the Petition by filing an Affidavit-in-Reply dated 15.09.2025. Respondent No. 5 has reiterated the grounds of rejection as recorded in the order dated 27.07.2020. Reliance is placed on Government Resolution dated 07.03.2019 and Circulars dated 06.02.2012 & 27.03.2024.

¶38

Mr. Prashant Bhavake, learned Advocate for the

¶39

Petitioner has canvassed the following arguments :-

¶40

(a) Respondent No. 6 is a minority institution.

¶41

(b) Appointment of the Petitioner was on a post,

¶42

which was additionally sanctioned in the staff schedule for academic year 2018-19 onwards.

¶43

(c) Additional post of Junior Clerk in the staff schedule was sanctioned by Respondent No. 5 for the Academic Year 2018-2019. Reliance is placed on “Private Secondary School: Non-Teaching Staff:

¶44

Sanchmanyata Year 2018-2019”, which indicates two

¶45

4 of 7

¶46

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶47

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶48

sanctioned posts of Junior Clerk.

¶49

(d) Reliance is placed on the order dated 10.05.2021

¶50

of Respondent No. 5, wherein 4 sanctioned posts of Junior Clerk are shown.

¶51

(e) Recruitment of the Petitioner was after complying with the procedure as required. The proposal, complete in all respects, was submitted to Respondent No. 5 for approval.

¶52

(f) Ban imposed on recruitment during COVID-19 pandemic by the Circular dated 04.05.2020, relied upon by Respondent No. 5 in the Affidavit-in-Reply, would not apply to appointment which is prior to 04.05.2020.

¶53

Per contra, the learned AGP for the State/Respondent relies on the Affidavit-in-Reply dated 15.09.2025 and the reasons given in the order dated 27.07.2020, to oppose the Petition.

¶54

Records placed before us and more particularly, the letter dated 30.08.2019 at Page No.37 of the paper-book, read with the order dated 10.05.2021 at Page No. 79 of the paper-book issued by Respondent No. 5, indicate that four posts of Junior Clerk were sanctioned by Respondent No. 5 along with other posts in so far as

¶55

5 of 7

¶56

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶57

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶58

the Respondent No. 7 School is concerned.

¶59

The impugned Order dated 27.07.2020 rejects the approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the post of Junior Clerk on the sole ground of the Petitioner’s appointment being made prior to sanctioning of the non-teaching posts as required by the Government Resolution dated 27.03.2019. Respondent No. 5 having granted approval to the post of Junior Clerk (four numbers) as is evident from the letter dated 30.08.2019 read with the order dated 10.05.2021, that the impugned order is required to be set aside.

¶60

Respondent No.5, by the Affidavit-in-Reply, has made an attempt to supplant further reasons for passing the order dated 27.07.2020. The Respondents cannot be permitted to supplant reasons by way of an Affidavit to support the order impugned (See Mohinder Singh Gill & Another v/s. Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and Others)¹

¶61

For the aforesaid reasons, this Petition is partly allowed . The impugned order dated 27.07.2020, passed by Respondent No. 5, is quashed and set aside.

¶62

1 1978 (1) SCC 405

¶63

6 of 7

¶64

Rohit Ghuge - PA

¶65

174.as.wp.10104.2025.odt

¶66

Respondent No. 5 is directed to grant approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the post of Junior Clerk under the Shikshan Sevak Scheme from the date of sanction of the said post and three years and thereafter, as permanent Junior Clerk by issuing a formal order within a period of 45 days. Respondent No. 4 is further directed to grant the Shalarth ID to the Petitioner within 15 days of granting the approval.

¶67

There shall be no order as to costs.

¶68

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶69

7 of 7

¶70

Rohit Ghuge - PA

Jijimol Samraj v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Sec. School Edu. and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jijimol Samraj v. the State of Maharashtra Thr the Sec. School Edu. and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Crestline Developer Llp., vs the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Meghraj Financial Consultants Priavate Limited vs Nandlal Balkishan Sahjwani

Tree House High School Kondhwa and Ors. vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Its Principal Secretary and Anr.

Hiten Ramesh Rajgor vs Union of India

Kalamandir through Its Partner Marityunjay Nebhwani vs Crystal Co-Operative Housing Society Ltd. through Its Chairman

Heisetasse Beverages Pvt. Ltd. vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Thru. Assistant Commissionera Ward