Bombay High Court
NISHANT PARASHURAM MAHALKARIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Allowed
Holding
The impugned order rejecting the appointment was quashed and the Education Officer was directed to approve the petitioner’s appointment as junior clerk.
Summary
The petitioner, Nishant Parashuram Mahalkari, challenged the Education Officer’s order rejecting approval of his appointment as junior clerk in a partially aided private school, alleging the rejection was based on a purported surplus of non‑teaching staff. The petitioner argued that his appointment dated 10 June 2024 preceded the Director’s communication of 28 May 2025, which barred approvals unless surplus staff were absorbed, and that no surplus junior clerk existed according to the officer’s own minutes. The respondents contended that the appointment must comply with the surplus‑staff rule under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 and the Regulation Act, 1977. The court examined the chronology, the applicability of the 2025 communication, and a later Government Resolution dated 11 August 2026, finding that the rejection was unsustainable. Consequently, the court quashed the impugned order, directed the Education Officer to approve the appointment, and ordered the release of arrears and issuance of necessary identification within stipulated periods.
Issues considered
- Whether the Education Officer’s rejection of the appointment on the ground of surplus non‑teaching staff complies with the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 and Regulation Act, 1977.
- Whether the Director’s communication dated 28 May 2025, and the subsequent Government Resolution dated 11 August 2026, affect the validity of the rejection.
- Whether the appointment made on 10 June 2024, prior to the 28 May 2025 communication, can be upheld despite the alleged surplus.
- Whether the Education Officer is obligated to grant approval to the appointment and release the petitioner’s arrears.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- appointment
- surplus staff
- private school
- education officer
- partially aided post
- judicial review
- writ petition
- government resolution
- service rules
Judgment
2026:BHC-KOL:8848-DB
18-WP-11950-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11950 OF 2025
Nishant Parashuram Mahalkari ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary And Others ...Respondents
——————
Mr. Sandeep Koregave a/w Ms. Supriya Koregave, for the Petitioner.
Mr. A.P.Vanarase, AGP for the Respondent-State.
Ms. Ashok Misal (through VC), for the Respondent No. 5.
——————
Coram : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
Date : SEPTEMBER 11, 2026
P. C. :
1. By the present Petition, the Petitioner impugns the order dated
25th June, 2025 passed by the Education Officer rejecting the proposal
for approval to the Petitioner’s appointment on a partially aided post of
junior clerk with effect from 10th June, 2024 in Respondent No. 7-school.
2. The Petitioner was appointed in the Respondent No. 7 school
after the post of junior clerk became vacant, upon retirement of one Mr.
Parshuram Bhaskar Mahalkari on 30th April, 2024. On 8th April, 2024,
Respondent No. 6 applied to the Respondent No. 5-Education Officer
seeking permission to initiate the recruitment process to fill the said
post by issuing advertisement, to which there was no response.
Arya Chavan 1 of 4
18-WP-11950-2025.doc
Subsequently, the management issued an advertisement, to which the
Petitioner applied and was selected by appointment order dated 10 th
June, 2024. On 12th June, 2024, a proposal was sent to the Education
Officer seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the
partially aided post of junior clerk in Respondent No. 7-school, which
was rejected by the impugned order.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner would point out that the
grounds for rejection was availability of surplus non-teaching staff, and
in view of the communication dated 28th May, 2025. He would further
submit that the Education Officer failed to notice that the Petitioner's
appointment was made on 10th June, 2024 i.e. prior to the issuance of
communication dated 28th May, 2025, and in any event, there was no
surplus junior clerk available, as per the Education Officer’s own
minutes regarding the availability of surplus staff.
4. Per contra, learned AGP would support the impugned order and
would submit that since the post of junior clerk is of direct service, the
appointment is required to be done after completing Sanch Manyata
surplus rule as per the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools
(Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981,and its regulations.
5. The only ground on which the approval was rejected is that the
surplus non-teaching staff was available, and the communication dated
28th May, 2025, issued by the Director of Education prohibits approval to
Arya Chavan 2 of 4
18-WP-11950-2025.doc
be granted unless surplus staff is absorbed. Insofar as the
communication dated 28th May, 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner has
been appointed on 10th June, 2024, and after seeking permission from
the Respondent-Education Officer on 8th April, 2024, to fill the post by
issuing advertisement. It is only due to inaction on part of Respondent-
Education Officer that the management, in compliance of Section 5 of
the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service)
Regulation Act, 1977, proceeded to fill the vacant post of junior clerk. In
any event, the communication dated 28th May, 2025 already stands
superseded by Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026. The
rejection on the ground of non-absorption of surplus junior clerk will
also not survive in view of the Education Officer’s own minutes dated
16th July, 2025 annexed at page 51 of the Petition. Perusal of the said
minutes would indicate that no surplus junior clerk was available at the
time of the Petitioner's appointment.
6. In light of the above, the impugned order is clearly unsustainable
and is hereby quashed and set aside.
7. The Education Officer is directed to grant approval to the
appointment of the Petitioner on the post of junior clerk with effect
from 10th June, 2024 within a period of three weeks from today.
8. After approval has been granted, Respondent No. 3 to include the
name of the Petitioner in Shalarth Pranali and issue Shalarth ID within a
Arya Chavan 3 of 4
18-WP-11950-2025.doc
period of two weeks thereafter. The Petitioner’s arrears of grant-in-aid
salary to be released within a period of three weeks thereafter.
9. The Petition is allowed in the above terms.
10. Applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and stand
disposed of.
[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]
Arya Chavan 4 of 4
Checking your session…