( 1 ) wp4871.18 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 964 WRIT PETITION NO. 4871 OF 2018 VIJAYKUMAR GUNAJIRAO WATANE VERSUS THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER ZP PARBHANI AND OTHERS Mr. V.B. Anjanwatikar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. R.S. Wani, AGP for the respondent-State. Mr. S.S. Rathi, Advocate for respondent No.3. CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT & JITENDRA JAIN, JJ. DATE : 18.08.2026 PC :- 01. This petition is filed praying for issuance of writ of mandamus directing respondent No.3 to submit his proposal as per notice dated 01.08.2012 and to direct respondent No.2 to consider his proposal for seeking retiral benefits. 02. Learned Advocate Mr. Rathi appearing for respondent No.2 at the outset states that the petitioner had given notice to Head Maser of the School i.e. earlier respondent No.3 and not to the Management. The Head Master does not have Authority to forward the proposal to the Education Officer. The letter is thus addressed to wrong authority. If the petitioner makes request and sends proposal to the management, the 2026:BHC-AUG:37473-DB ( 2 ) wp4871.18 management would be an appropriate authority to forward it to respondent No.2 – Education Officer. He submits that the management is ready to undertake the exercise. 03. Considering the above, this Court finds that this petition can be conveniently disposed of by asking the petitioner to submit fresh application to respondent No.3 i.e. Marathwada Marathi Bhamti Samaj. Respondent No. 3, thereafter, shall prepare the proposal and send it to respondent No.2. It is for respondent No.2 to thereafter to consider the proposal within eight weeks from the date of receipt, in accordance with law. The petitioner shall make such application within one week from today. 04. We thus allow this writ petition with aforesaid directions and dispose off the same accordingly. [JITENDRA JAIN, J.] [KISHORE C. SANT, J.] snk/2026/Aug26/wp4871.18