NITA ANNASO PATILversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE SECRETARY , SCHOOL EDUCATION AND SPORTS DEPARTMENT AND ORS

                                                 72-wp-15022-2023.doc




        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR

                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                WRIT PETITION NO.15022 OF 2023

Nita Annaso Patil                                ...Petitioner
      Vs
The State Of Maharashtra Thr.
The Secretary , School
Education And Sports
Department And Ors                               ...Respondents
                              …..
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Utkarsh Desaid, Advocate for respondent nos. 5 & 6.

Mr. V. M. Mali, AGP for respondents-State.
                               …..

                        CORAM :      R.G. AVACHAT AND
                                     AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.

                       DATE      :   28th JANUARY, 2026.
P.C:

1.     Heard.

2.     Considering the nature of the petition, the case pertains to

rejection of approval to the petitioner’s appointment which is done

by way of upgradation from a part-time post to a full-time post.

3.     The facts are not in dispute. The petitioner was appointed on

an unaided part-time post as an Assistant Teacher (English) on



                                                                  1 of 4
adn
                                                   72-wp-15022-2023.doc


15th June 2014. On 29th August 2016, the petitioner’s

appointment was approved by the Deputy Director of Education,

and thereafter such approval was continued from time to time.

4.    On account of superannuation of a full-time Assistant

Teacher, namely Shri D. B. Gaikar, a vacancy on a fully aided post

of full-time Assistant Teacher arose at Respondent No.6 – Junior

College on 28th February 2022. Taking recourse to the scheme

provided under the Government Resolution dated 10th June 2005,

Respondent No.5 – the educational institution took a decision to

upgrade the petitioner from a part-time post to a full-time post.

5.    It is not disputed that the petitioner is duly qualified to be

appointed/upgraded to the full-time post of Assistant Teacher

(English).   Accordingly,      after   following   due      process,      the

management appointed the petitioner to the said full-time post

vide order dated 1st March 2022. Consequently, in August 2022, a

proposal was submitted by the college and the management to the

concerned authority, i.e., the Deputy Director of Education,

seeking approval to the upgradation of the petitioner to the post of

full-time Assistant Teacher.

6.    On 6th October 2022, Respondent No.4 communicated



                                                                    2 of 4
adn
                                                72-wp-15022-2023.doc


certain deficiencies in the proposal. As per the petitioner’s

contention, the said deficiencies were duly removed by the

management by forwarding a covering letter dated 9th February

2023.

7.      It is the contention of Mr. Bhavake, learned Advocate for the

petitioner, that despite removal of all deficiencies, the concerned

authority, by the impugned order, rejected the proposal. He

submits that the objections raised by the concerned authority fall

into two categories: firstly, treating the upgradation of the

petitioner from a part-time post to a full-time post as a fresh

appointment; and secondly, objections relating to compliance of

certain documentary requirements.

8.      Mr. Bhavake, learned Advocate for the petitioner, submits

that in view of the Government Resolution dated 10th June 2005,

it is undisputed that the petitioner’s appointment is not a fresh

appointment, but one of upgradation. Mr. Mali, learned AGP, fairly

agrees with this contention and submits that the present case is

one of upgradation and not a fresh appointment.

9.      In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to permit the

petitioner and the college management to submit a comprehensive



                                                                 3 of 4
adn
                                               72-wp-15022-2023.doc


proposal to the Deputy Director of Education seeking approval to

the appointment of the petitioner by way of upgradation. Such

proposal shall be submitted within a period of four weeks from

today. The petitioner and the college management shall submit all

requisite documents as indicated in the impugned order.

10.   The concerned authority shall bear in mind that the case is

governed by the Government Resolution dated 10th June 2005

and that it is not a case of fresh appointment, but one of

upgradation. The concerned authority shall take an appropriate

decision on the proposal, in accordance with law, within a period

of eight weeks from the date of submission of the proposal, after

granting an opportunity of hearing to the parties.

11.   The Writ Petition stands disposed of.




[AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, J.]                     [ R.G. AVACHAT J.]




                                                                4 of 4
adn