Bombay High Court

NAV MAHARASHTRA SHIKSHAN MANDAL MANGAON THR ITS PRESIDENTversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Deputy Director of Education lacks jurisdiction; the matter must be decided by the State Government’s Education Department.

Summary

The petitioners, Nav Maharashtra Shikshan Mandal Mangaon, sought to have a clock‑hour basis teaching post merged into a part‑time post. They argued that the State Government, not the Deputy Director of Education, had jurisdiction to decide the proposal. The Deputy Director had declined, stating the matter would increase sanctioned posts and was beyond his authority. The High Court held that the decision indeed lies with the State Government’s Education Department, especially since the High Power Committee had already issued guidelines via a government resolution. Consequently, the court allowed the writ petition, directing the Education Department to decide the application of 22 April 2025 promptly.

Issues considered

Does the Deputy Director of Education have jurisdiction to approve the clubbing of a clock‑hour basis post into a part‑time post?
Is the State Government/Education Department the appropriate authority to decide the proposal?
Do the guidelines issued by the High Power Committee bind the decision‑making authority?

Subjects

jurisdiction
education department
post classification
clubbing of posts
writ petition
administrative law

Judgment

2026:BHC-KOL:7884-DB

42-WP-17-2026.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO. 17 OF 2026

Nav Maharashtra Shikshan Mandal Mangaon Thr Its ...Petitioners
President And Ors.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Others ...Respondents

——————
Mr. Prashant Bhavake, for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondent-State.
——————
Coram : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH &
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.
Date : AUGUST 21, 2026
P. C. :

1. The contention of Mr. Bhavake, learned counsel for the Petitioner

is that the request for clubbing of the clock-hour basis post into a part

time post is an issue within the jurisdiction of the State Government,

however, the State Government had sent the proposal for consideration

to the Director of Education, who has thereafter sent the same to the

Deputy Director of Education. Pointing out to the impugned order

dated 10th September, 2025, he submits that the Deputy Director of

Education has held that the proposal would result in increase in the

sanctioned posts, which is not within the purview of the Office of

Deputy Director of Education. He submits that the proposal is therefore

Arya Chavan 1 of 2
42-WP-17-2026.doc

required to be decided at the level of the State Government.

2. This Court is informed that the issue is required to be decided at

the level of State Government, Education Department as the High

Power Committee, which was constituted has already given necessary

guidelines by way of Government Resolution.

3. In view thereof, the Petition is allowed by directing the Education

Department of State Government to decide the application dated 22 nd

April, 2025 expeditiously.

4. Needless to clarify that by the impugned order the Deputy

Director of Education has merely stated that it does not have the

jurisdiction, and therefore, the same would not come in the way of the

proposal being decided by the State Government.

[NEERAJ P. DHOTE, J.] [SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]

Arya Chavan 2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…