SHASHIKANT SHRIPATI KSHIRSAGARversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH THE SECRETARY AND ORS

                                                               89-WP-10296-2022.doc



              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                       CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                      CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                     WRIT PETITION NO. 10296 OF 2022

Shashikant Shripati Kshirsagar                       ...Petitioner
          Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others                  ...Respondents
                                ——————
Mr. N. V. Bandiwadekar, Senior Advocate with Ms. Ashwini Bandiwadekar & Mr.
Utkarsh Desai, for the Petitioner.
Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondents-State.
Mr. Sagar Mane, for the Respondent Nos.4 & 5.
Mr. M. S. Topkar with Ms. Bhargavi Patil & Mr. Neev Patil, for the Respondent
No.6.
                                ——————
                                  Coram :     Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
                                              Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
                                  Date      : September 28, 2026.
P. C. :

1.        By the present petition, the challenge is to the impugned order

dated 2/7th January 2020 passed by the Respondent No.3-Education

Oicer deciding the seniority inter se between the Petitioner and the

Respondent No.6.

2.        Mr. Bandiwadekar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the

Petitioner would point out that the impugned order is unreasoned, non-

speaking order and only notes the submissions of the parties.

3.        Mr. Topkar, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent No.6

would fairly not support the impugned order.


Gaikwad RD                         1 of 3
                                                            89-WP-10296-2022.doc



4.      Perusal of the impugned order would substantiate the contention

of Mr. Bandiwadekar.      After noting the rival claims, the Education

Oicer has passed the order without any discussion and without any

inding on the questions itself forming part of the impugned order. It is

expected that the Respondent No.3, being the quasi-judicial authority,

while deciding the inter se seniority dispute will give proper reasons and

proper inings, which indicate application of mind.        Perusal of the

impugned order would indicate that the same is an unreasoned and

non-speaking order, which cannot be sustained. It would, therefore, be

appropriate, if the impugned order is quashed and set aside and the

issue is remitted to Education Oicer to be decided afresh, after

hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

5.      The impugned order dated 2/7th January 2020 is hereby quashed

and set aside.

6.      The dispute is remitted to the Education Oicer to be decided

afresh.

7.      The parties to appear before the Education Oicer on 5 th October

2026.

8.      The Education Oicer shall hear the parties and take a decision

afresh on the inter se seniority between the Petitioner and Respondent

No.6 expeditiously, in any event within a period of six weeks from the

date of irst appearance of the parties.


Gaikwad RD                       2 of 3
                                                                                     89-WP-10296-2022.doc



                        9.      It is expected that a detailed, reasoned and speaking order will be

                        passed by the Respondent No.3.

                        10.     The Petition is allowed in the above terms.



                         [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.]                       [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

           Digitally
           signed by
           RAJU
RAJU       DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD    Date:
           2026.09.29
           15:01:55
           +0530




                        Gaikwad RD                        3 of 3