Bharati Ravindra Kapare and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Bharati Ravindra Kapare and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

All writ petitions disposed of with directions: (a) the aggrieved petitioner to follow the procedure in Clause No.5.10.1 and make an application to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishads within seven working days; (b) the concerned CEO to verify from the data available and write a concise order if the application has to be rejected; (c) any teacher aggrieved by the CEO's order to be at liberty to strictly follow Clause No.5.10.2 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, the further process being governed by the other clauses of that Resolution; (d) until the CEO decides the representation, the earlier order that the petitioner should not be relieved to continue protecting the petitioner till the CEO's decision; (e) the concerned CEO to try to follow the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024 as far as possible; pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners' grievances regarding their transfers should be resolved through the mechanism prescribed by the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024 (application to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishad under Clause No. 5.10.1, with further remedy under Clause No. 5.10.2) rather than by direct judicial adjudication of the transfers. +1 more

Court's answer

Where the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024 provides a mechanism for dealing with transfer grievances, this Court takes the same view as the Coordinate Bench and directs the petitioners to avail that mechanism rather than deciding the transfer disputes itself.

Ratio / Principle

The aggrieved petitioner must follow the procedure in Clause No.5.10.1 and make an application to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishads within seven working days.

Key takeaways

The concerned CEO shall verify from the data available and write a concise order if the application has to be rejected.ratio¶6
Any teacher aggrieved by the CEO's order is at liberty to strictly follow Clause No.5.10.2 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, and the further process shall be governed by the other clauses of that Resolution.ratio¶6
Until the CEO decides the representation, the earlier order that the petitioner should not be relieved continues to protect the petitioner till the CEO's decision.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi and Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ., per curiam), 17 March 2026. Seventeen writ petitions by Zilla Parishad teachers, led by Writ Petition No. 11079 of 2025 (Raosaheb Balaji Jadhav and another v. State of Maharashtra) with Civil Application CA/10909/2025, concerning the petitioners' transfers (status quo having been granted) in the setting of the Teacher Transfer Management System (TIMS) and the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, were disposed of by following the Principal Seat order in Maharashtra Rajya Shikshak Parishad, Prathamik Vibhag v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Writ Petition No. 11788 of 2025 with companion matters, decided 23.09.2025). Holding: where the Government Resolution provides a mechanism, this Court takes the same view as the Coordinate Bench. Directions: (a) aggrieved petitioners to apply to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishads under Clause No.5.10.1 within seven working days; (b) the CEO to verify from the available data and write a concise order if rejecting; (c) aggrieved teachers free to pursue the Clause No.5.10.2 remedy, the further process governed by the other clauses of the GR; (d) the earlier order that petitioners should not be relieved continues until the CEO decides; (e) the CEO to follow the GR dated 18.06.2024 as far as possible. Pending applications disposed of.

2026:BHC-AUG:12113-DB

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{1}

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

904 WRIT PETITION NO. 11079 OF 2025 WITH

CA/10909/2025 IN WP/11079/2025

Raosaheb Balaji Jadhav And Another VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 11052 OF 2025

Samdani Chandsab Shaikh And Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Principle Secretary And Others

WITH

WRIT PETITION NO. 11053 OF 2025

Ramesh Shivaji Pawar And Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Principle Secretary And Others

AND

905 WRIT PETITION NO. 11095 OF 2025

Smita Asaram Waghmare

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

906 WRIT PETITION NO. 11123 OF 2025

Urmila Shankarrao Bade And Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

907 WRIT PETITION NO. 11124 OF 2025

Manisha Baburao Yadav And Another

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{2}

908 WRIT PETITION NO. 11275 OF 2025

Shantilal Devsing Rathod And Others

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

909 WRIT PETITION NO. 11319 OF 2025

Rustum Dasrao Rathod And Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Others

AND

910 WRIT PETITION NO. 11322 OF 2025

Jyoti Kisanrao Bagulwad And Another

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

911 WRIT PETITION NO. 11453 OF 2025

Alaknanda Maruti Nagargoje

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

912 WRIT PETITION NO. 11455 OF 2025

Chhaya Shamrao Nikam And Another

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

934 WRIT PETITION NO. 524 OF 2026

Deepali Ramesh Jadhav

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

WRIT PETITION NO. 11125 OF 2025

Smt. Jayshri Machhindra Darkunde and Another

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{3}

AND

WRIT PETITION NO. 11959 OF 2025

Syed Abdul Hafiz Zafar Ali

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

WRIT PETITION NO. 11099 OF 2025

Bharti Ravindra Kapare and Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

WRIT PETITION NO. 10797 OF 2025

Tarachand Laxman Parande and Others

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

AND

WRIT PETITION NO. 11537 OF 2025

Swati Madhukar Zaware and Others

VERSUS

State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

Mr. E.S. Murge, Advocate for Petitioners in WP/11079/2025

Mr. Ramrao D. Biradar, Advocate for Petitioners in WP/11052/2025, WP/11053/2025, WP/11319/2025

Mr.Sambhaji G. Munde, Advocate for Petitioner in WP/11095/2025, WP/11123/2025, WP/11124/2025, WP/11322/2025, WP/11453/2025

Mr. Nitin K. Chaudhari, Advocate for Petitioners in WP/11455/2025

Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar, Advocate for Petitioners in WP/11275/2025, WP/524/2026, WP/11125/2025, WP/11959/2025, WP/11099/2025, WP/10797/2025, WP/11537/2025

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for Respondents No.3 & 4 in WP/11079/2025, 11052/2025, WP/11053/2025, WP/11319/2025

Mr. P.R.Nagare, Advocate for Respondents No.3 and 4 in WP/11095/2025,11123/2025, WP/11124/2025, WP/11322/2025

Mr. S.R. Dheple, Advocate for Respondents No.3 to 5 in WP/11455/2025 and for Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/11275/2025, 11659/2025

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{4}

Ms. M.V. Narwade, Advocate for Respondents No.4 and 5 IN WP/524/2026 and for Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/11125/2025, WP/11099/2025, WP/10797/2025

Ms. Sheetal V. Salunke, Advocate for Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/11537/2025

Ms. Neha B. Kamble, AGP for Respondents-State in WP/11079/2025, WP/11052/2025, WP/11053/2025, WP/11123/2025, WP/11124/20225, 11125/2025

Mr. V.M. Kagne, AGP for Respondents-State in WP/11095/2025, WP/11052/202511053/2025, WP/11455/2025, WP/11099/2025 Mr. R.S. Wani, AGP for Respondents-State in WP/11275/2025

Mr. S.B. Narwade, AGP for Respondents-State in WP/11319/2025, WP/524/2026, WP/10797/2025

Mr. Abhijit M. Phule, AGP for Respondents-State in WP11322/2025, WP/11959/2025

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondents-State in WP11453/2025 Mr. S.K. Tambe, Addl. GP. For Respondents-State in WP/11537/2025

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ. DATE : 17 MARCH, 2026

PER COURT :-

Writ Petition No.11125/2025, WP/11959/2025, 11099/2025, WP/10797/2025 AND WP/11537/2025 are not on board. Upon mentioning those matters are taken on board.

Heard the learned advocate for the appearing for the petitioners,

the learned AGPs for the State, and the learned advocate for the respondents in the respective petitions.

Learned Advocates for the petitioners place reliance on the order passed at the Principal Seat in Maharashtra Rajya Shikshak Parishad, Prathamik Vibhag vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors . (Writ Petition

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{5}

No. 11788 of 2025 with companion matters, decided on 23.09.2025). Note was taken of the fact that those petitioners, as well as some similarly situated petitioners, had approached the Nagpur Bench, this Bench and the Circuit Bench at Kolhapur of this Court and, in some matters, taking into consideration the fact that there were mid-term transfers, some interim orders were passed. Thereafter, taking into consideration the submissions made on behalf of the Government as well as the advocate representing the different Zilla Parishads, note regarding effecting transfers of teachers throughout the State was taken. It has been noted that the data of lakhs of teachers is collected by various Zilla Parishads and that the said data is fed into the Teacher Transfer Management System (TIMS), which is a system operated by the Rural Development Department of the Government of Maharashtra. This system considers various categories of employees who are liable to be transferred. Then, it was submitted that the entire system of Annual General Transfers (AGT) operates like a chain, and those liable to be transferred move out of their seats and proceed to the posts where they have been posted, and another person occupies the said transferred seat. The said transfer orders have created problems, as the teachers whose transfers have been stayed would remain there itself, while the persons transferred to their places would have either been relieved or would be expecting to be relieved. Thereafter, the Coordinate Bench has

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{6}

taken note of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, more particularly the clauses pertaining to how a transfer should be effected, the categories in which it can be effected, as well as how the grievance of a transferee can be considered. Those provisions were considered. Thereafter, it was noted that all the petitioners before the Court showed their agreement to move their individual applications to the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) of the respective Zilla Parishads within a particular period in terms of Clause No. 5.10.1. It was then directed that the CEO would consider the record and take a decision in each case within a period of 30 days, and thereafter, by giving such directions, those petitions were disposed of.

Here also, status quo was granted in respect of the transfers of the petitioners, and therefore we are also taking note of Clause Nos. 5.10.1, 5.10.2, 5.10.3 and 5.10.4 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024. We are not taking a view different from that taken by the Coordinate Bench when the mechanism is provided. We had adjourned the matters yesterday to make it convenient for the learned advocates for the petitioners to take instructions from the petitioners as to whether they agree to avail the couple convenience provided policy in the said Government Resolution itself.

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

In view of all these aspects and the facts, we also make it clear that, similar to the Coordinate Bench, we are not expecting the CEO to write a lengthy order, but the order should reflect that he has analysed the record and the material in respect of each petitioner. However, if any teacher/petitioner is aggrieved, he/she can avail of the remedy under Clause No. 5.10.2. Since paragraph No. 10 of the said order already gives directions to the Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department, we need not issue similar directions once again.

In view of the above, we dispose of all the writ petitions with the following directions:

a) The aggrieved petitioner would follow the procedure in Clause No.5.10.1 and make an application to the CEO of the respective Zilla Parishads, within a period of seven working days from today.

b) The concerned CEO would verify from the data available and write a concise order if the application has to be rejected.

c) Any teacher aggrieved by the order of the CEO would be at liberty to strictly follow Clause No.5.10.2 of the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024. The further process shall be governed by the other clauses of the said Government Resolution.

904-WP-11079-25 (+15).odt

{8}

d) Until the CEO decides the representation, the order passed earlier that the petitioner should not be relieved, would continue to protect such petitioner, till the decision of the CEO.

e) The concerned CEO should try to follow the Government Resolution dated 18.06.2024, as far as possible.

1. In view of the disposal of the Writ Petitions, pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of

[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE

S P Rane

Parties & counsel

AI extract

petitioner
Raosaheb Balaji Jadhav And Another (Petitioners in WP/11079/2025)¶{1}
E.S. Murge
petitioner
Samdani Chandsab Shaikh And Others (Petitioners in WP/11052/2025)¶{1}
Ramrao D. Biradar
petitioner
Ramesh Shivaji Pawar And Others (Petitioners in WP/11053/2025)¶{1}
Ramrao D. Biradar
petitioner
Smita Asaram Waghmare (Petitioner in WP/11095/2025)¶{1}
Sambhaji G. Munde
petitioner
Urmila Shankarrao Bade And Others (Petitioners in WP/11123/2025)¶{1}
Sambhaji G. Munde
petitioner
Manisha Baburao Yadav And Another (Petitioners in WP/11124/2025)¶{1}
Sambhaji G. Munde
petitioner
Shantilal Devsing Rathod And Others (Petitioners in WP/11275/2025)¶{2}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Rustum Dasrao Rathod And Others (Petitioners in WP/11319/2025)¶{2}
Ramrao D. Biradar
petitioner
Jyoti Kisanrao Bagulwad And Another (Petitioners in WP/11322/2025)¶{2}
Sambhaji G. Munde
petitioner
Alaknanda Maruti Nagargoje (Petitioner in WP/11453/2025)¶{2}
Sambhaji G. Munde
petitioner
Chhaya Shamrao Nikam And Another (Petitioners in WP/11455/2025)¶{2}
Nitin K. Chaudhari
petitioner
Deepali Ramesh Jadhav (Petitioner in WP/524/2026)¶{2}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Smt. Jayshri Machhindra Darkunde and Another (Petitioners in WP/11125/2025)¶{2}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Syed Abdul Hafiz Zafar Ali (Petitioner in WP/11959/2025)¶{3}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Bharti Ravindra Kapare and Others (Petitioners in WP/11099/2025)¶{3}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Tarachand Laxman Parande and Others (Petitioners in WP/10797/2025)¶{3}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
petitioner
Swati Madhukar Zaware and Others (Petitioners in WP/11537/2025)¶{3}
Arvind G. Ambetkar
respondent
The State Of Maharashtra (Respondent-State in the petitions)¶{1}
Neha B. Kamble, V.M. Kagne, R.S. Wani, S.B. Narwade, Abhijit M. Phule, S.B. Pulkundwar, S.K. Tambe
respondent
Respondents No.3 & 4 in WP/11079/2025, WP/11052/2025, WP/11053/2025 and WP/11319/2025¶{3}
S.B. Pulkundwar
respondent
Respondents No.3 and 4 in WP/11095/2025, WP/11123/2025, WP/11124/2025 and WP/11322/2025¶{3}
P.R. Nagare
respondent
Respondents No.3 to 5 in WP/11455/2025 and Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/11275/2025 and WP/11659/2025¶{3}
S.R. Dheple
respondent
Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/524/2026, WP/11125/2025, WP/11099/2025 and WP/10797/2025¶{4}
M.V. Narwade
respondent
Respondents No.4 and 5 in WP/11537/2025¶{4}
Sheetal V. Salunke

Coram

AI extract

Smt. Vibha Kankanwadimember¶{4}
Hiten S. Venegavkarmember¶{4}