Bombay High Court

VINOD ANNA JADHAVversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF
Bench: N B SURYAWANSHI ABASAHEB D SHINDE

Holding

The respondent Education Officer must decide the petitioner's proposal on its merits within eight weeks of the order.

Summary

Vinod Anna Jadhav filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, Aurangabad Bench, challenging the failure of the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Beed, to decide on a proposal he submitted on 06‑02‑2015. The petitioner alleged that the inaction violated his right to a timely administrative decision. The Court examined whether the respondent had a statutory duty to consider the proposal and whether the delay amounted to a breach of natural justice. Finding that the proposal remained undecided, the Court held that the respondent must decide the matter on its merits. Accordingly, the Court directed the Education Officer to render a decision within eight weeks of receiving a copy of the order.

Issues considered

What duty, if any, does the Education Officer have to decide the petitioner's proposal within a reasonable time?
Does the failure to decide constitute a violation of the petitioner's right to speedy administrative action?

Subjects

writ petition
administrative delay
education department
statutory duty
natural justice
high court order

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:24965-DB


                                                *1*                      918wp428o25


                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                              WRIT PETITION NO. 428 OF 2025
                                   VINOD ANNA JADHAV
                                            VERSUS
                      THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS
                                 SECRETARY AND OTHERS
                                               ...
                Shri Shaikh Majit S., Advocate for the Petitioner.
                Shri A.M. Phule, AGP for the Respondents/ State.
                Shri Suhas R. Shirsath, advocate for respondent No.3.
                                               ...

                                  CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI
                                                  &
                                             ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.

                                  DATE : 25 June 2026


                P. C. :-

                            The Writ Petition is disposed of by directing

                respondent No.2 Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad,

                Beed, to decide the proposal of the petitioner at exhibit C dated

                06.02.2015, if not already decided, on its own merits, within a

                period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this

                order.




        kps     (ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)       (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…