VIKAS ANNASAHEB NAKADEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

2026:BHC-AUG:39941-DB




                                             (1)                     wp4699.26


                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                             WRIT PETITION NO. 4699 OF 2026
                                         WITH
                           CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9634 OF 2026

                              VIKAS ANNASAHEB NAKADE
                                      VERSUS
            THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

           Mr. V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for the petitioner.
           Ms.S.S. Joshi, AGP for the respondent-State.
           Mr. V.P. Golewar, Advocate for respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

                                         CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
                                                 JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
                                         DATE  : 27.08.2026

           PC :-

           01.          Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner, learned AGP for

           respondent Nos.1 to 3 and learned Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5.



           02.          The petitioner has approached this Court with a prayer to

           direct respondent No.5 Head Mistress to submit proposal for approval to

           the post of Junior Clerk in respondent No. 5 – school. By way of Civil

           Application No. 4699 of 2026, the petitioner is now praying for stay to

           the proceeding adopted to appoint Junior Clerk in the school and seeks

           quashment of the advertisement published by the management in daily

           Lokmat dated 20.08.2026.
                                   (2)                       wp4699.26




03.        It is case of the petitioner that he was appointed by

Headmistress of respondent No.5 to the post of junior clerk by order

dated 04.08.2021. His appointment was for a period from 06.08.2021 till

05.08.2024.   It is his further case that after completion of probation

period successfully, his service came to be confirmed by the respondents.

However, inspite of this position, no proposal is forwarded for approval of

his services. On one hand though he is working on the said post, still the

Management, without any Authority and without terminating the services

of the petitioner, has issued further advertisement on 20.08.2026.

Learned Advocate thus submits that said advertisement is illegal.        He

submits that the person should be given at least 15 days time to respond

to the advertisement as per Rule 9(2)(B) of the Maharashtra Employees

of Private Schools Rules. In the present case no such time is given. He

assails the advertisement on that count as well.         Learned Counsel

submits that the petitioner needs to be treated as a permanent employee

in the school and also proposal needs to be forwarded. He also invites

attention to a communication, confirmation order with regard to the

petitioner dated 04.03.2026. This is also issued by the Head Mistress of

respondent No.5. He thus prays for allowing this petition.
                                     (3)                     wp4699.26


04.         Learned Advocate Mr. Golegaonkar for respondent No.5

invites attention of this Court to the appointment order. He submits that

in clause No.4, it was specifically made clear that the petitioner shall not

be entitled to get benefits of a regular employee.   By clause No.7, it was

stated that the petitioner would be entitled only to Rs. 2000/-

honorarium per month. He submits that thereafter again by order dated

18.08.2025 the petitioner was appointed temporarily only for a period

from 02.06.2025 till 30.04.2026.     The appointment itself was only a stop

gap arrangement and no regular appointment was given to the petitioner

at any point of time.       Since the petitioner was appointed without

following due process of law, there was no question of sending proposal

for approval of his services. He prays for dismissal of the petition.



05.         Learned AGP also opposes this petition.       He submits that

there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was appointed by

following due process of law as per Rule 9 of MEPS Rules, 1981.          She

also prays for dismissal of the petition.



06.         At the outset this Court asked the petitioner as to whether his

appointment was made by following due process of law by publishing

advertisement. Learned Advocate Mr. Panpatte fairly concedes that there
                                   (4)                     wp4699.26


was no advertisement issued while giving appointment to the petitioner.

He further submits that, however, that itself will not take away his right

to get regularization in service as he has worked satisfactorily for a

period more than three years.     It was incumbent on the part of the

management to confer permanent status upon petitioner by sending

proposal.



07.         In the present case the petitioner during the course of

arguments, invited attention to letter of confirmation. However, looking

to the same, it is clearly seen that the letter dated 04.03.2026 is only a

certificate issued by the Headmistress stating that the petitioner’s

conduct during the said tenure was excellent. This Court does not find

any letter/communication issued by the management at any point of

time showing that the petitioner is appointed following due process.

Clause No. 10 of the appointment order clearly shows that the

appointment of the petitioner is purely on temporary basis.    Clause 11

also shows that the appointment was subject to approval by the

Education Officer.   It is seen that the petitioner thereafter joined on

06.08.2021 by giving joining report pursuant to the appointment order.

This conduct of the petitioner shows that he accepted the terms and

conditions of appointment order while joining the services knowingly.
                                    (5)                     wp4699.26




08.         Learned Advocate for the petitioner at this stage invites

attention to clause “B”, i.e. modality to appoint staff or to recruit staff

dated 27.02.2003.     Clause “B” shows that a person should be given 15

days time to make application pursuant to an advertisement. This Court

finds that, however, the petitioner has not applied pursuant to order

dated 20.08.2026.     This Court made specific query as to whether the

petitioner has applied for the post pursuant to the advertisement. It is

told that he has not applied pursuant to the advertisement, as he was

under an impression that since he was already working there, there is no

need to make an application. He was also under an impression that if he

applied pursuant to the advertisement, it would be treated that he is not

working there and in order to avoid that he has not applied. Since the

petitioner had not applied pursuant to an advertisement, he cannot be

said to be a person aggrieved for the reason of not giving 15 days time.



09.         Appointment order dated 18.08.2025 also shows that his

appointment was only for one year and it was specifically submitted that

the appointment will not confer any right to claim regularization. Thus,

considering over all position, this Court finds that there is hardly any

scope to entertain this petition.
                                      (6)                          wp4699.26




10.        During the course of arguments, learned Advocate for the

petitioner invites attention of this Court to section 5(2A) of the Rules,

which reads as under :-

           “5(2A) - Subject to the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (4), Assistant
           Teacher (Probationary) shall, on completion of the probation period of
           three years, be deemed to have been appointed and confirmed as a
           teacher.”

.          He pointed out this portion to submit that when a person has

worked for a period of 3 years, he is deemed to have been appointed and

confirmed as a teacher.      So far as section 5 (2A) is concerned, said

provision cannot be read in isolation.        It will have been taken that a

person who is duly appointed in the manner prescribed, which is made

clear in section 5(1), which reads as under :-

           “5.    Certain obligations of Management of private schools.

           (1)    The Management shall, as soon as possible fill in, in the manner
           prescribed, every permanent vacancy in a private school by the
           appointment of a person duly qualified to fill such vacancy;

                  Provided that unless such vacancy is to be filled in by promotion,
           the Management shall, before proceeding to fill such vacancy, ascertain
           from the Educational Inspector, Greater Bombay, the Education Officer,
           Zilla Parishad or, as the case may be, the Director or the officer
           designated by the Director in respect of schools imparting technical,
           vocational, art or special education, whether there is any suitable person
           available on the event of such person being available, the Management
           shall appoint that person in such vacancy.”


.          Thus in view of section 5(1) and proviso, it is clear that sub-

section (2A) would be applicable only when a person fulfills criteria
                                          (7)                      wp4699.26


prescribed under section 5(1). It is further seen that Rule 9 of the MEPS

Rules also provide for manner of appointment of staff.



11.                Thus, this Court finds that no right is shown by the petitioner

vested in him to get regular appointment. No case is made out to invoke

writ jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India.



12.                This Writ Petition being devoid of merits, stands dismissed.



13.                In view of disposal of this Writ Petition, connected Civil

Application does not survive and stands disposed off.




         [JITENDRA JAIN, J.]                      [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]


snk/2026/Aug26/wp4699.26