Bombay High Court

APARNA CHANDRAKATN SAWANT AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. THE SECRETARY AND ORS

Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The court quashed the impugned order and granted the petitioners a further opportunity to comply with the noted deficiencies, subject to payment of costs.

Summary

The petitioners' applications for employee approval were rejected by the Education Officer on the ground of non‑compliance with certain deficiencies. The petitioners argued that the notice of deficiencies dated 29 November 2024 was served only on the headmaster on 3 December 2024, leaving insufficient time to remedy the issues before the hearing on 9 December 2024. The court found that the short period indeed prevented the petitioners from complying and, considering the stakes involved, decided to grant them a further opportunity to address the deficiencies. The impugned order of 9 December 2024 rejecting the approval was quashed, subject to the petitioners depositing a cost of Rs.10,000 each. The petitioners were directed to comply within three weeks, after which the Education Officer must decide the proposal within four weeks, and, if approved, the Deputy Director of Education must issue the necessary IDs and release the grant‑in‑aid salary within stipulated periods.

Issues considered

Whether the notice of deficiencies and the limited time to comply violated principles of natural justice.
Whether the impugned order rejecting the petitioners' approval should be set aside.
Whether the court may grant a fresh opportunity to comply with deficiencies subject to costs.

Subjects

writ petition
approval rejection
deficiencies
natural justice
cost order
quash order
compliance deadline
Shalarth Pranali

Judgment

66-67-WP-3111-3164-2026.doc

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

(66) WRIT PETITION NO. 3111 OF 2026

Sangeeta Shirish Khandeparkar
(nee Sangeeta Krishnat Bhosale) & Others ...Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.

WITH
(67) WRIT PETITION NO. 3164 OF 2026

Aparna Chandrakatn Sawant and Others ...Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.

——————
Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioners.
Mr. Atul P. Vanarase, AGP, for the Respondents-State in WP/3111/2026.
Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP, for the Respondents-State in WP/3164/2026.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : August 21, 2026.
P. C. :

1. The Petitioners' approval came to be rejected for non-compliance

of the deiciencies by the Management.

2. Mr. Bhavake submits that the Education Oicer issued a notice on

29th November, 2024 to the Petitioners communicating certain

deiciencies in the proposal and scheduled the hearing on 9 th December

2024. He submits that the notice was served upon the Headmaster only

Gaikwad RD 1 of 3
66-67-WP-3111-3164-2026.doc

on 3rd December 2024 and, therefore, the Petitioners did not get

suicient time to comply with the deiciencies before the scheduled

hearing on 9th December 2024. He submits that as suicient time was

not given, the Petitioners could not comply with the deiciencies and an

opportunity be given to comply with the deiciencies.

3. The learned AGP would point out that as the deiciencies were

not complied with, by the impugned order, the approval has been

rejected.

4. We have considered the submissions and perused the record.

5. There is no dispute about the fact that the time to comply with

the deiciencies was of a short duration, by virtue of which the

Management was unable to comply with the deiciencies. Considering

that it is the employees' approval which is at stake, we are inclined to

grant one more opportunity to the Petitioners to comply with the

deiciencies noted in the communications of 29 th November 2024 and

13th December 2024.

6. The petitions have been iled in the year 2026, though the

rejection is of the year 2024. We are of the opinion that an opportunity

can be given subject to payment of cost of Rs.10,000/- each to be paid

to the Bombay High Court, Kolhapur Bench Bar Association Ad-hoc

Committee.

7. The aforesaid amount shall be deposited in the following account

Gaikwad RD 2 of 3
66-67-WP-3111-3164-2026.doc

within a period of two weeks from the date of this order. The account

details are as under:

Name : Bombay High Court Kolhapur Bench Bar
Association Ad-hoc Committee
Account No. : 0003-201-0001745
Patsanstha : Shri. Gajanan Nagari Sahakari
Pathsanstha Ltd., Patalewadi, Kolhapur.
8. As this Court is inclined to grant an opportunity to the Petitioners

to comply with the deiciencies, the impugned order dated 9 th December

2024, is quashed and set aside.

9. The Petitioners to comply with the deiciencies within a period of

three weeks from today. The Education Oicer to decide the proposal

within a period of four weeks thereafter.

10. In event, the deiciencies are complied with to the satisfaction of

the Education Oicer, the approval to be granted within a period of four

weeks.

11. The Respondent No.4-Deputy Director of Education to include the

Petitioners' name in the Shalarth Pranali and issue Shalarth IDs in event

the approval is granted, within a period of three weeks after the grant

of approval and the grant-in-aid salary to be released within a period of

four weeks thereafter.

[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]

Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.08.21
20:15:18
+0530 Gaikwad RD 3 of 3

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…