Sudhakar Tabaji Temkar vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Sudhakar Tabaji Temkar vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Direction to respondent No.3 / the concerned Chief Executive Officer of the respective Zilla Parishads to consider the petitioners' requests and the benefit of couple convenience as and when a vacancy arises or such situation arises to bring the couple at one place; petitioners free to apply under the Government Resolution for the online transfer process within two months.

Issue for consideration

Whether the respondent Zilla Parishad should be directed to give posting to the petitioners as per their convenience and as per the couple convenience scheme.

Court's answer

The Court declined to disturb the existing school postings at this stage, since the month of January had arrived, students were busy preparing for their examinations, and a particular teacher had already been teaching them.

Ratio / Principle

The petitioners have a chance to participate in the online process of transfer under the Government Resolution, which would take place within two months, provided they make the application required under that Government Resolution.

Key takeaways

The petitions were disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 / the concerned Chief Executive Officer of the respective Zilla Parishads to consider the petitioners' requests and the benefit of couple convenience as and when a vacancy arises or such situation arises to bring the couple at one place.ratio¶55

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Six writ petitions (W.P. Nos.14097, 14169, 14171, 14686, 14697 and 15264 of 2025) by teachers serving under Zilla Parishads in Maharashtra sought directions for posting as per their convenience under the couple convenience scheme. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Aurangabad Bench (Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi & Hiten S. Venegavkar, JJ.; order dated 17.01.2026, corrected per Speaking to Minutes order dated 10.02.2026) disposed of the petitions. The Court declined to disturb existing school postings mid-academic session, noting that students were preparing for examinations and a particular teacher had already taught them; it observed that the online transfer process under the Government Resolution would take place within two months, in which the petitioners could participate upon making the required application; and it directed respondent No.3 / the concerned Chief Executive Officer of the respective Zilla Parishads to consider the petitioners' requests and the benefit of couple convenience as and when a vacancy arises or such situation arises to bring the couple at one place.

2026:BHC-AUG:7110-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

(This order is corrected as per Speaking to Minutes order dated 10.02.2026.)

916 WRIT PETITION NO.14097 OF 2025

SWATI RAMCHANDRA DAREKAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner

Mr. R.S. Wani, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2

Ms. Sheetal Salunke, Advocate for respondent No.4

917 WRIT PETITION NO.14169 OF 2025

SHIREEN PIRMOHAMMAD SHAIKH

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner Miss. Neha B. Kamble, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Ms. Sheetal Salunke, Advocate for respondent No.4

918 WRIT PETITION NO.14171 OF 2025

NILAM DNYANDEO KADUS

VERSUS

2

916_WP_14097_2025+5_Corrected

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner

Mr. S.K. Tambe, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Ms. Sheetal Salunke, Advocate for respondent No.4

939 WRIT PETITION NO.14686 OF 2025

SUNITA GULAB JAWALE ALIAS SUNITA AVINASH GAIKWAD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner

Mr. S.B. Narwade, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4

940 WRIT PETITION NO.14697 OF 2025

SUDHAKAR TABAJI TEMKAR

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner

Mr. A.M. Phule, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2

Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4

3 916_WP_14097_2025+5_Corrected

952 WRIT PETITION NO.15264 OF 2025

MANGALA GULABRAO JAWALE ALIAS MANGALA BHARAT PADALE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Mr. Hemant U. Dhage, Advocate for petitioner

Miss. Neha B. Kamble, AGP for respondent Nos.1 and 2 Ms. Sheetal Salunke, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

DATE : 17^th JANUARY, 2026

ORDER :

. The petitioners in all these petitions seek directions to

respondent – Zilla Parishad to give posting to them as per their convenience and as per the couple convenience scheme.

2 Heard learned Advocate Mr. Hemant U. Dhage for petitioner in

all petitions. We have also heard learned AGP as well as learned Advocate Ms. Sheetal Salunke and Mr. S.B. Pulkundwar, who waive notice in respective

4

916_WP_14097_2025+5_Corrected

petitions.

3 The first and the foremost fact that is required to be noted is that already we are in the month of January and as regards the schools are concerned, the students are busy in preparation of their examination. Up till now a particular teacher has taught them and, therefore, we do not want to disturb the set up. Secondly, within two months period the online process of transfer as per the Government Resolution would take place and the petitioners have chance to participate in the process. Of course, for that purpose they should make an application as required under the Government Resolution.

4 We dispose of the petitions by directing respondent No.3 / concerned Chief Executive Officer of the respective Zilla Parishads to consider the request of petitioners and also the benefit of couple convenience as and when the vacancy arises or such situation arises to bring the couple at one place.

( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. )

( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. )

agd