Suchetan Prabhakar Fagade vs the Education Officer Thane Mced and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Suchetan Prabhakar Fagade vs the Education Officer Thane Mced and Ors. — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Both petitions disposed of with a direction that the Commissioner (Education) deal with the pending proposals for approval of transfer to the aided Establishment by following due process laid down in law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within sixty days.

Issue for consideration

Whether the pending proposals seeking approval for the transfer of the Petitioners to the aided Establishment should be decided within a timeframe by the competent authority. +1 more

Court's answer

Both writ petitions disposed of with a direction that the Commissioner (Education) deal with the pending proposals by following the due process laid down in law, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of sixty days.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Writ Petitions Nos. 8736 and 9026 of 2025 (Suchetan Prabhakar Fagade and Apeksha alias Hemashree Ajit Pawar v. The Education Officer, Thane Municipal Corporation and ors.) were filed seeking directions that pending proposals for approval of the petitioners' transfer to the aided Establishment be decided within a timeframe, and that the Competent Authority decide payment of salary arrears from 1st January 2025. The Court noted the order dated 3rd February 2025 of this Court (Aurangabad Bench) in Writ Petition No.1021 of 2025 (Mansi Arun Kelkar v. State of Maharashtra), which — noting Friends Social Circle v. State of Maharashtra, [2023(5) ALL MR 601] (quashing the GR dated 1st December 2022) — set aside the State Government circulars dated 29th April 2024 and 3rd October 2022 under which such transfer-approval proposals were to be decided by the State. The AGP pointed out the State Government Notification dated 23rd December 2025 referring to a corrigendum GR published in the Maharashtra Gazette on 13th November 2025 amending Clause No.41A(1)(h), under which the Commissioner (Education), State of Maharashtra, Pune is now the competent authority (Circular and Gazette copy marked 'X' for identification). The Division Bench (Ravindra V. Ghuge & Abhay J. Mantri, JJ.) disposed of both petitions with a direction that the Commissioner (Education) deal with the proposals by following due process laid down in law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within sixty days.

901.as.wp.8736.2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO. 8736 OF 2025

Suchetan Prabhakar Fagade ….Petitioner

Versus

The Education Officer Thane Municipal Corporation and ors. ….Respondents

WITH

CIVIL WRIT PETITION NO.9026 OF 2025

Apeksha alias Hemashree Ajit Pawar

….Petitioner

Versus

The Education Officer Thane Municipal Corporation and ors. ….Respondents

Ms. Kumud Bhatia for the Petitioner in both the Petitions.

Mr. Rohit Sakhadeo for Respondent Nos.1 and 2 – Thane Municipal Corporation in both the Petitions.

Mr. A. R. Deolekar, AGP for the Respondent Nos.3, 4 & 7 – State in both the Petitions.

---- CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE : 29^th JANUARY, 2026

P.C. :-

We have heard the learned Advocate for the Petitioners, the learned AGP for the State and the learned Advocate for the Thane Municipal Corporation. Mr. Sakhadeo is now on the panel of Thane Zilla Parishad, and since he is appearing for Respondent No.1

in these matters, we called upon him to assist the Court for and on

Vina Khadpe 1 of 4

901.as.wp.8736.2025.odt

behalf of Respondent No.2. Hence, he has appeared even for Respondent No.2.

We have perused the order dated 3^rd February 2025, passed by this Court at the Aurangabad Bench in Writ Petition No.1021of 2025 ( Mansi Arun Kelkar Vs. The State of Maharashtra through its Principal Secretary and others ), (wherein this Court has noted the Judgment delivered in Friends Social Circle and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others [2023(5) ALL MR601] , quashing the GR dated 1^st December, 2022), and has set aside the circulars dated 29^th April, 2024 and 3^rd October, 2022, issued by the State Government, by which the proposals seeking approval for transfer of the candidate from unaided to partially aided, or partially aided to fully aided Establishment, were directed to be decided by the State.

The AGP points out that, in consequence to the above, the State Government has issued a Government Notification dated 23^rd December 2025, which refers to a corrigendum GR published in the Maharashtra Gazette on 13^th November, 2025, by which Clause No.41A(1)(h) has been amended, and the Authority to decide such

2 of 4

Vina Khadpe

901.as.wp.8736.2025.odt

proposals is now the Commissioner (Education), State of Maharashtra, Pune, who will be the competent Authority to deal with such proposals.

The said Circular dated 23^rd December, 2025, along with a copy of the State Gazette publishing the Notification dated 13^th November, 2025, issued by the School Education and Sports Department, are collectively marked as ‘X’ for identification.

The prayer put forth in these two Petitions is that the pending proposals seeking approval for the transfer of the Petitioners to the aided Establishment, be decided within a timeframe, and a decision with regard to the payment of arrears of the unpaid salary from 1^st January, 2025, shall be taken by the Competent Authority.

The learned AGP appearing on behalf of Respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 7, submits that in view of the documents ‘X’ , the Commissioner (Education) would now take a decision on these proposals.

In view of the above, both these Petitions are

3 of 4

Vina Khadpe

901.as.wp.8736.2025.odt

disposed off with a direction that the Commissioner (Education) would deal with the said proposals by following the due process laid down in law, as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within a period of sixty days from today.

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.)

(RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

4 of 4

Vina Khadpe