Bombay High Court

RAJESH VASANT KINIversusTHE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY) AND ORS

Decided: 6 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: G S KULKARNI AARTI A SATHE

Holding

The Court held that the Education Officer must decide the pending objections to the seniority lists within four weeks, as the failure to do so breaches a statutory duty and warrants the issuance of a mandamus.

Summary

The petitioner, Rajesh Vasant Kini, an assistant teacher at Anant Janardhan Vartak Junior College, challenged two seniority lists dated 18 November 2024 and 6 November 2025, alleging they were prepared in violation of Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. He filed objections with the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar, but the officer failed to decide them despite a legal notice. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus under Article 226 of the Constitution directing the officer to decide the objections and to grant him the post of Supervisor. The High Court examined whether the officer’s inaction constituted a breach of statutory duty warranting mandamus. The Court held that the officer must decide the pending objections within four weeks and hear the parties, as no prejudice would be caused to the respondents. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed with the order directing the officer to act and no costs were awarded.

Issues considered

Whether the Education Officer’s failure to decide the petitioner’s objections to the seniority lists amounts to a breach of statutory duty justifying a writ of mandamus under Article 226.
Whether the seniority lists prepared by the school management are illegal under Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion to the post of Supervisor based on the challenged seniority lists.

Legislation cited

Constitution of India — s. Article 226
Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981 — s. Rule 12

Subjects

Article 226
mandamus
seniority list
private school employees
Rule 12
promotion
administrative law

Judgment

1 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

WRIT PETITION NO.8901 OF 2026

Rajesh Vasant Kini, Age 50 years,
R/o.At Tighare, Post Agarwadi,
Tal.Palghar, Dist.Palghar. Petitioner

versus

1. The Education Officer (Secondary),
Zilla Parishad, Palghar.
2. The State of Maharshtra
3. The Secretary, Gramin Vidya Viks Vardhini Mandal
A/P.Agarwadi, Tal.Palghar.
4. The Principal, Anant Janardhan Vartak Jr.College,
A/P.Agarwadi, Tal.Palghar. Respondents

_______
Mr.Kashyap Bhalerao for Petitioner.
Mrs.Devyani S.Deshmukh, AGP, for Respondent
_______

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
AARTI SATHE, JJ.

DATE: 6th August 2026

P.C.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed

praying for the following sole substantive relief :

“a. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of mandamus or any other
appropriate Writ, Order or Direction in the like nature under Article 226 of the
Constitution of India, thereby directing the Respondent no.1 to decide the
objections and applications filed by the Petitioner against the illegal seniority lists
dated 18.11.2024 and 06.11.2025 prepared by the School Management and
thereafter to grant the post of Supervisor to the Petitioner with all the
Digitally signed
by MANISH
MANISH SURESHRAO consequential benefits in time bound manner by quashing the earlier seniority lists
SURESHRAO THATTE
THATTE Date: 2026.08.11
14:10:57 +0530 dated 18.11.2024 and 06.11.2025.

M.S.Thatte
2 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC

2. The only grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition is the non

consideration of the pending objections raised by the Petitioner against the illegal

seniority list prepared by the management of the school, which is pending disposal.

3. Briefly the facts are as follows. The Petitioner was appointed as

Shikshan Sevak (Assistant Teacher) in Anant Janardhan Vartak Junior College run

by Gramin Vidya Vikas Vardhini Mandal since 2006. It is the Petitioner’s

contention that on 12th June 2006 the Petitioner, by Government Resolution dated

6th May 2014 (No.SSN-1007/(154/07) TNT) and departmental orders, revised the

Petitioner’s appointment date to 12th June 2006. On 30th April 2010, the Deputy

Director of Education, Mumbai issued approval order of the even date approving

his appointment in the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4600/-.

4. It is the Petitioner’s case that on 18th November 2024 and 6th

November 2025, the school management prepared two seniority lists and both the

seniority lists were illegal and contrary to law as they were not prepared in

accordance with Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools

(Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. Being aggrieved by the said two faulty

seniority lists, the Petitioner has filed objections and applications before

Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar. It is

the Petitioner’s contention that no decision has been taken insofar as pending

objections of the Petitioner are concerned by Respondent no.1 i.e. Education

Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar despite issuance of legal notice by the

Petitioner dated 20th March 2026.

M.S.Thatte
3 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC

5. It is this inaction on the part of Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer

(Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar of not deciding the objections of the Petitioner

in respect of seniority lists dated 18 th November 2024 and 6th November 2025 is

what is causing prejudice to the Petitioner. It is incumbent upon Respondent no.1

therefore that the aforesaid objection be decided expeditiously and in a time bound

manner.

6. In our view, considering the limited relief that the Petitioner seeks in

the petition and although there being no written opposition/reply of the

Respondents, considering the nature of the orders we propose to pass, no prejudice

would be caused to the Respondents. The following order would serve the ends of

justice.

ORDER

(i) The Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad

shall consider and decide the objections and applications filed by the Petitioner

against seniority lists dated 18th November 2024 and 6th November 2025 issued by

the school management as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of

four weeks from the date this order is made available to Respondent no.1 i.e.

Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, by the Petitioner;

(ii) Let all parties be heard;

(iii) All rights and contentions of the parties are expressly kept open;

(iv) The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

(AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

M.S.Thatte

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…