Bombay High Court
SUMIT VILAS AWATADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The order rejecting approval of the petitioner’s appointment is set aside and the Education Officer is directed to grant approval.
Summary
The petitioner, Sumit Vilas Awatade, was appointed as a junior clerk in a grant‑in‑aid private school on 10 July 2024. The Education Officer rejected the approval of this appointment on the ground that surplus non‑teaching staff existed, relying on a communication dated 28 May 2025 and the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. The petitioner contended that his appointment preceded the communication, that no surplus junior clerk existed at the time, and that a later Government Resolution dated 11 August 2026 superseded the earlier directive. The Court held that the Education Officer’s rejection was unsustainable, quashed the impugned order, and directed the officer to approve the appointment, issue a Shalarth ID, and release arrears. Consequently, the petition was allowed.
Issues considered
- Whether the Education Officer could lawfully reject the appointment of the petitioner on the ground of surplus non‑teaching staff under the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 and the Regulation Act, 1977.
- Whether the communication dated 28 May 2025 and the subsequent Government Resolution dated 11 August 2026 affect the validity of the appointment made on 10 July 2024.
Legislation cited
Subjects
- appointment
- surplus staff
- grant‑in‑aid school
- education officer
- Maharashtra service rules
- writ petition
- quashing order
Judgment
2026:BHC-KOL:8849-DB
19-WP-11951-2025.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 11951 OF 2025
Sumit Vilas Awatade ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra Thr. The Secretary And ...Respondents
Others
——————
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. 4.
——————
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 aided post of junior
clerk with effect from 10th July, 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.
Ramesh Appa Chikhale on 31st May, 2019. On 13th June, 2024,
Respondent No. 6 applied to the Respondent No. 5-Education Officer
seeking permission to initiate the recruitment process to fill the said
Arya Chavan 1 of 4
19-WP-11951-2025.doc
post by issuing advertisement, to which there was no response.
Subsequently, the management issued an advertisement, to which the
Petitioner applied and was selected by appointment order dated 10 th
July, 2024. On 6th August, 2024, a proposal was sent to the Education
Officer seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner on the
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 July, 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
Arya Chavan 2 of 4
19-WP-11951-2025.doc
28th May, 2025, issued by the Director of Education prohibits approval to
be granted unless surplus staff is absorbed. Insofar as the
communication dated 28th May, 2025 is concerned, the Petitioner has
been appointed on 10th July, 2024, and after seeking permission from
the Respondent-Education Officer on 13th June, 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 61 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 July, 2024 within a period of three weeks from today.
8. After approval has been granted, Respondent No. 3 to include the
Arya Chavan 3 of 4
19-WP-11951-2025.doc
name of the Petitioner in Shalarth Pranali and issue Shalarth ID within a
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…