Bombay High Court
PRABODHAN SHIKSHAN PRASARAK SANSTHA AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR THE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION AND SPORTS AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The impugned order dated 12 September 2022 is quashed and set aside.
Summary
The petitioners challenged an order dated 12 September 2022 issued by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri, which rejected the appointment of petitioner No.3 as a peon without providing any reasons, merely citing six Government Resolutions. The petitioners argued that such an order violated principles of natural justice and sought its quashing. The Court examined the necessity of stating reasons for rejection and the relevance of a Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015, also referring to the precedent set in Vikas Shikshan Mandal v. State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition No.6812 of 2024). The Court held that the impugned order was unsustainable for being devoid of reasons and consequently quashed it. It directed the Education Officer to consider the staffing pattern in line with the 2015 resolution, to prepare the necessary Shalarth ID, and to follow the procedural timeline for registration, while keeping the petitioners' contentions open. The writ petition was partly allowed and disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether an order rejecting a proposal for appointment without stating reasons is violative of natural justice and liable to be quashed.
- Whether the Education Officer must interpret and apply the Government Resolution dated 12 February 2015 as per the precedent in Vikas Shikshan Mandal case.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to relief directing the Education Officer to consider the staffing pattern and process the appointment.
Subjects
- appointment
- natural justice
- quashing order
- education officer
- government resolution
- staffing pattern
- writ petition
- Maharashtra
Judgment
14-wp13719-2023.docx
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13719 OF 2023
Prabodhan Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha & Anr.
VAIBHAV
RAMESH
JADHAV
VERSUS
Digitally signed by
VAIBHAV RAMESH
JADHAV
Date: 2026.07.02
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
18:13:07 +0530
Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the petitioners.
Mr. A. P. Vanarase, AGP for the State.
CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV & NANDESH S.
DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATED : JULY 2, 2026
P.C.:
1. Heard Mr. Bhavake, learned Advocate for the petitioners, and Mr.
Vanarase, learned AGP for the State.
2. The impugned order dated 12th September 2022, which is
appended at page No.54 of the petition, has been passed by the
Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri. Prima facie, on
reading the said order, it is seen that the said order is sans reasons and,
most importantly, it does not give the list of deficiencies which are
required to be cured by the petitioner. On the face of the record, such
an order is not sustainable and deserves to be quashed and set aside
forthwith.
VRJ 1
14-wp13719-2023.docx
3. It is prima facie seen that the proposal for approval of
appointment of petitioner No.3 as Peon has been rejected by virtue of
the impugned order; however, when any proposal for approval is
rejected, reasons for the rejection have to be given. The impugned order
dated 12th September 2022 states that, by relying upon six Government
Resolutions issued by the Government, the proposal of the petitioner
has been rejected. We cannot countenance such an order, and an order
sans reasons does not stand to test.
4. The impugned order dated 12th September 2022 passed by the
Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri is quashed and
set aside.
5. We make it incumbent upon the Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri, to consider the effect of the decision of this
Court dated 2nd February 2026 in the case of Vikas Shikshan Mandal,
Savarde (Budruk), Tq. Kagal, Dist, Kolhapur through its
President/Secretary & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra, through the
Secretary, School Education and Sports Department & Ors ., in Writ
Petition No.6812 of 2024.
6. It is prima facie seen that the entire case of the petitioner hinges
upon the interpretation of the Government Resolution dated 12th
February 2015, which was one of the subject Government Resolutions
VRJ 2
14-wp13719-2023.docx
referred to in the impugned order at reference No.6 thereof. In
consonance with the said Government Resolution, the petitioner is in a
position to place on record the staffing pattern with regard to the date
of appointment of the petitioner as Peon in the educational institution,
and the same is directed to be accepted by the Education Officer
concerned and dealt with while considering the proposal of the
petitioner in accordance with law.
7. Needless to state that if the case of the petitioner is approved
affirmatively, then in that case the proposal for Shalarth ID shall be
prepared and sent to the Deputy Director of Education concerned for
registration, and if any such proposal is sent to the Deputy Director of
Education, he/she shall also grant the same within a period of two
weeks from the date of receipt thereof in accordance with law.
8. Needless to state that if the Education Officer desires to hear the
petitioner, the petitioner shall make himself available either in person or
through his representative to be heard by the Education Officer before
the proposal of the petitioner is determined by the Education Officer.
9. All contentions of the petitioners are kept open.
10. Writ Petition is partly allowed and disposed of in the above terms.
(NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.)
VRJ 3
Checking your session…