Bombay High Court
NITIN VAMANRAO AHIREversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION AND SPORTS AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court declined to issue mandamus and directed that the pending proposal be decided expeditiously after hearing the parties.
Summary
The petitioner, Nitin Vamanrao Ahire, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution seeking a mandamus directing the Education Officer to approve his pending proposal dated 08-07-2025 and appoint him as Headmaster with the appropriate pay scale. The respondents, the State of Maharashtra and officials of the Department of Education, contested the relief. The Court observed that the proposal is still pending before the Education Officer and ordered that it be decided after hearing the parties, directing the petitioner to appear before the authority on 30 September 2026. No substantive merits were adjudicated, and all contentions were kept open for further hearing. The petition was disposed without costs, directing expeditious consideration of the pending proposal.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, is appropriate under Article 226 for a pending appointment proposal?
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the Education Officer to approve the petitioner’s appointment as Headmaster.
Legislation cited
- Constitution of India — s. Article 226
Subjects
- Writ petition
- Article 226
- Mandamus
- Appointment
- Headmaster
- Education Officer
- Pending proposal
- Expeditious decision
Judgment
403- WP-12676-2026.DOC
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 12676 OF 2026
Nitin Vamanrao Ahire ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Thr.
The Principal Secretary
Department of Education and
Sports & Ors ...Respondents
_______
Mr Aditya S Deore, with Sanjeev B Deore, Suchita J Pawar, Arman Ansari,
Shamshad Ali, for Petitioner.
Mr P P Kakade, Addl GP, with Devyani Deshmukh, AGP for Respondent-State.
_______
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. This Writ Petition is filed praying for the following limited reliefs, which
read thus:-
“(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested
in it under Art 226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate directions/writ/order whereby
directing the Respondent No-2 to decide the Petitioner's pending
proposal dated 08.07.2025 and further grant approval to the
appointment of the Petitioner as Headmaster w.e.f. 08.07.2025.
AND/OR.
(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested
in it under Art 226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of
mandamus or any other appropriate directions/writ/order thereby
directing the Respondent No-2 that after grant of approval to the
Page 1 of 2
Shivgan
403- WP-12676-2026.DOC
Petitioner as headmaster w.e.f. 08.07.2025 further place or grant the
Petitioner the pay scale of the Headmaster.
(c) Any other relief in favour of this Petitioner may be granted by this
Hon'ble Court.”
2. Although neither the reply is filed on behalf of Respondent No. 4 nor he is
represented, considering the nature of the order intended to be passed, no
prejudice will be caused to him.
3. Without going into the merits of the rival contentions, we are of the opinion
that the proposal, which is the subject matter of the prayers, is pending to be
decided by the Education Officer. Let the same be decided after hearing the
concerned parties in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible Let, the
Petitioner appears before the concerned authority on 30 th September 2026 along
with a copy of the present order.
4. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open.
5. The Writ Petition stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Digitally
signed by
SHAMBHAVI
SHAMBHAVI NILESH
NILESH SHIVGAN
SHIVGAN Date:
2026.09.24
11:27:17
+0530
Page 2 of 2
Shivgan
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.