Disposed¶23

Vasant Narayan Dange and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Dept. of Education and Sports and Ors.

Bombay HC6 Feb 2026WP/298/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Shalarth ID; Shalarth Pranali; Deputy Director of Education Pune inaction; approval by Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad Solapur; Junior Clerks appointment approval; Ashwini Yogesh Shete v. State of Maharashtra (CWP No.6897 of 2021, 20-10-2021) followed; Maharashtra education department; writ petition disposed with direction to decide pending proposals within one month.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the Deputy Director of Education, Pune, to decide the pending proposals of the Petitioners within one month from the date of production of the Order before him by the Petitioners; with this direction the Writ Petition stands disposed of. ¶23

Vasant Narayan Dange and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Dept. of Education and Sports and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶23

Issue for consideration

Whether, once approval has been granted by the Education Officer to the Petitioners' appointments, the Deputy Director of Education can refuse to enter the names of the Petitioners in the Shalarth Pranali / provide Shalarth IDs.

¶17

Court's answer

Once approval has been granted by the Education Officer, the Deputy Director of Education cannot refuse to enter the names of the Petitioners in the Shalarth Pranali; the present case is squarely covered by the judgment in Ashwini Yogesh Shete v. State of Maharashtra.

¶17

Ratio / Principle

The Deputy Director of Education, Pune, is directed to decide the pending proposals of the Petitioners within a period of 1 month from the date of production of the Order before him by the Petitioners.

¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Kolhapur Circuit Bench), Writ Petition No.298 of 2026 (Madhav J. Jamdar & Pravin S. Patil, JJ., decided 24 March 2026): Petitioners, appointed as Junior Clerks by their respective Managements following due procedure of law, had their appointments approved by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur, but the Deputy Director of Education, Pune took no steps to provide Shalarth IDs for induction of their names into the Shalarth Pranali. Following Ashwini Yogesh Shete v. State of Maharashtra (Civil Writ Petition No.6897 of 2021 and connected matters, decided 20 October 2021), the Court held that once the Education Officer grants approval, the Deputy Director of Education cannot refuse to enter the Petitioners' names in the Shalarth Pranali, directed the Deputy Director of Education, Pune, to decide the pending proposals within one month of production of the Order, and disposed of the Writ Petition.

¶1

904-WP-298-2026.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

¶3

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.298 OF 2026

¶4

Vasant Narayan Dange & Ors.

¶5

...Petitioners

¶6

Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents

¶7

Adv. Suchita J. Pawar (Through Video Conferencing), for the Petitioners. Mr. R. P. Kadam, ‘B’ Panel Counsel, for the Respondent - State.

¶8

——————

¶9

Coram: Madhav J. Jamdar & Pravin S. Patil, JJ. Date: March 24, 2026

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

1. In the present Petition, the Petitioners, who were appointed by following the due procedure of law by the respective Managements, came to be appointed to the posts of Junior Clerks. After their appointment, individual proposals were forwarded to the Education Oicer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Solapur. The Education Oicer, after considering the merits of the proposals, granted approval to their appointments. As per the scheme of of the “Shalarth ID”, the matter was then referred to the Deputy Director of Education, Pune, for inducting their names into the “Shalarth Pranali” by providing “Shalarth IDs”. However, till date, no steps have been taken by the Deputy Director of Education to provide “Shalarth IDs” to the Petitioners and therefore, they have approached this Court in the present matter.

¶12

1 of 3

¶13

Arjun

¶14

904-WP-298-2026.doc

¶15

2. The Petitioners have relied upon the Judgment of this Court in the case of Ashwini Yogesh Shete v. State of Maharashtra¹ , wherein, in Paragraph No.7, this Court has observed as under:

¶16

“ 7. In our view, both these judgments and orders would squarely apply to the facts of the present cases. We do not propose to take a diferent view in the matter. The Dy. Director of Education could not have refused to enter the names of the Petitioners in Shalarth Pranali once the Education Oicer has already granted approval. The impugned order passed by the Dy. Director of Education on 22.09.2020 is contrary to the principles and law laid down by this court in the above judgment and order. The show cause notices issued by the Dy. Director of Education are also without jurisdiction. ”

¶17

3. In view of the above, we are also of the opinion that once approval has been granted by the Education Oicer, the Deputy Director of Education cannot refuse to enter the names of the Petitioners in the “Shalarth Pranali”. The present case is also squarely covered by the Judgment relied upon by the Petitioners in the case of Ashwini (supra).

¶18

4. Accordingly, the Deputy Director of Education, Pune, is directed to decide the pending proposals of the Petitioners within a period of 1 month from the date of production of this Order before him by the Petitioners.

¶19

1 Civil Writ Petition No.6897 of 2021 And Connected Matters (Decided On 20th October 2021)

¶20

2 of 3

¶21

Arjun

¶22

904-WP-298-2026.doc

¶23

5. With this direction, the Writ Petition stands disposed of.

¶24

[Pravin S. Patil, J.] [Madhav J. Jamdar, J.]

¶25

3 of 3

¶26

Arjun

Vasant Narayan Dange and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Dept. of Education and Sports and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vasant Narayan Dange and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Dept. of Education and Sports 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

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Bharati Shivaji Chougule vs State of Maharashtra through D E and Ors.

Vaishali D/O Kishor Dukare vs the State of Maharashtra Thro.Its Sec Education Dept and Ors.

Babaji Jayaram Shirke and Ors. vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secreatary, General Administration Department Mantralaya

Rohini Shivaji Patil and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Smt Nita Suresh Oulkar vs the State of Maharashtra Throu. the Sec. School Education and Sports Dept and Ors.

Elecon Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. vs Municipal Corporation of City of Ichalkaranji and Anr.