Bombay High Court
GAUTAM DINKAR MADHALEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION AND SPORTS DEPARTMENT AND ORS
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The order dated 5 December 2022 rejecting the petitioner’s proposal is quashed and set aside, and the Deputy Director must consider the proposal on its merits.
Summary
Gautam Dinkar Madhale applied for the post of Laboratory Assistant and his proposal was rejected by the Deputy Director of Education on 5 December 2022, relying on two earlier writ petitions (Writ Petition No. 5058 of 2021 and Writ Petition No. 8007 of 2021) that had obtained interim stays. Those writ petitions were subsequently disposed of by an order dated 6 February 2024. The petitioner challenged the rejection, arguing that the basis for the denial no longer existed. The Court held that, with the earlier writ petitions now disposed, there was no legal impediment to consider the proposal on its merits and therefore quashed the impugned order. The Deputy Director was directed to evaluate the application within four weeks, communicate any deficiencies, and, if approved, to process the appointment and salary disbursement within stipulated time‑frames. The writ petition was disposed in favour of the petitioner.
Issues considered
- What is the effect of the disposal of earlier writ petitions on the validity of the Deputy Director’s order rejecting the petitioner’s appointment proposal?
- Whether the order dated 5 December 2022 should be set aside and the proposal considered on its merits?
Subjects
- appointment
- laboratory assistant
- writ petition
- quashing order
- administrative law
- procedural fairness
- pending litigation
Judgment
27-WP-15607-2024.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 15607 OF 2024
Gautam Dinkar Madhale ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents
——————
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, for the Petitioner.
Mr. R. S. Pawar, AGP, for the Respondents-State.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : October 07, 2026.
P. C. :
1. By the present petition, the order dated 5th December 2022
passed by the Deputy Director of Education, which returns the proposal
submitted seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner to the
post of ‘Laboratory Assistant’ in view of the communication of 1 st
August 2022 of the Director of Education, is challenged.
2. The communication of 1st August 2022, when perused, would
indicate that the pendency of Writ Petition No.5058 of 2021 and Writ
Petition No.8007 of 2021, in which an interim stay was granted by this
Court, has been referred to. Learned counsel appearing for the
Petitioner would tender the order dated 6 th February 2024 passed in the
Gaikwad RD 1 of 3
27-WP-15607-2024.doc
said writ petitions, by which the writ petitions came to be disposed of.
He would submit that the challenge was raised by an Association in the
said writ petitions to the reduction of posts, pursuant to which the
communication of 1st August 2022 was issued.
3. As the writ petitions stand disposed of by order dated 6 th
February 2024, there is no impediment for considering the proposal of
the Petitioner seeking approval for the appointment as ‘Laboratory
Assistant’. The impugned order of 5th December 2022 does not examine
the proposal in other respects and has returned the proposal as
rejected, only in view of the orders passed in Writ Petition No. 5058 of
2021 and Writ Petition No. 8007 of 2021. As the said petitions stand
disposed of, the impugned order dated 5 th December 2022 is hereby
quashed and set aside.
4. The Deputy Director of Education is directed to consider the
proposal submitted by the Petitioner on its own merits and in
accordance with law.
5. Considering that the proposal has been pending since long, the
same to be decided expeditiously and, in any event, within a period of
four weeks from today.
6. In the event there are any deiciencies in the proposal, the same
to be communicated to the Management, who shall comply with the
same within a period of one week. In the event there are any
Gaikwad RD 2 of 3
27-WP-15607-2024.doc
deiciencies, the period of four weeks to decide the application to be
extended accordingly.
7. In the event, the proposal is approved, the Respondent No.2 to
include the name of the Petitioner in the Shalarth Pranali and allot the
Shalarth ID within a period of three weeks thereafter and release the
grant-in-aid salary within a further period of three weeks thereafter.
8. The Writ petition is disposed of in the above terms.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.10.07
19:37:04
+0530
Gaikwad RD 3 of 3
Checking your session…