14-wp13719-2023.docx IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 13719 OF 2023 Prabodhan Shikshan Prasarak Sanstha & Anr. VERSUS The State of Maharashtra & Ors. Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the petitioners. Mr. A. P. Vanarase, AGP for the State. CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV & NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : JULY 2, 2026 P.C.: 1. Heard Mr. Bhavake, learned Advocate for the petitioners, and Mr. Vanarase, learned AGP for the State. 2. The impugned order dated 12th September 2022, which is appended at page No.54 of the petition, has been passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri. Prima facie, on reading the said order, it is seen that the said order is sans reasons and, most importantly, it does not give the list of deficiencies which are required to be cured by the petitioner. On the face of the record, such an order is not sustainable and deserves to be quashed and set aside forthwith. VRJ 1 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2026.07.02 18:13:07 +0530 14-wp13719-2023.docx 3. It is prima facie seen that the proposal for approval of appointment of petitioner No.3 as Peon has been rejected by virtue of the impugned order; however, when any proposal for approval is rejected, reasons for the rejection have to be given. The impugned order dated 12th September 2022 states that, by relying upon six Government Resolutions issued by the Government, the proposal of the petitioner has been rejected. We cannot countenance such an order, and an order sans reasons does not stand to test. 4. The impugned order dated 12th September 2022 passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri is quashed and set aside. 5. We make it incumbent upon the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri, to consider the effect of the decision of this Court dated 2nd February 2026 in the case of Vikas Shikshan Mandal, Savarde (Budruk), Tq. Kagal, Dist, Kolhapur through its President/Secretary & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra, through the Secretary, School Education and Sports Department & Ors., in Writ Petition No.6812 of 2024. 6. It is prima facie seen that the entire case of the petitioner hinges upon the interpretation of the Government Resolution dated 12th February 2015, which was one of the subject Government Resolutions VRJ 2 14-wp13719-2023.docx referred to in the impugned order at reference No.6 thereof. In consonance with the said Government Resolution, the petitioner is in a position to place on record the staffing pattern with regard to the date of appointment of the petitioner as Peon in the educational institution, and the same is directed to be accepted by the Education Officer concerned and dealt with while considering the proposal of the petitioner in accordance with law. 7. Needless to state that if the case of the petitioner is approved affirmatively, then in that case the proposal for Shalarth ID shall be prepared and sent to the Deputy Director of Education concerned for registration, and if any such proposal is sent to the Deputy Director of Education, he/she shall also grant the same within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt thereof in accordance with law. 8. Needless to state that if the Education Officer desires to hear the petitioner, the petitioner shall make himself available either in person or through his representative to be heard by the Education Officer before the proposal of the petitioner is determined by the Education Officer. 9. All contentions of the petitioners are kept open. 10. Writ Petition is partly allowed and disposed of in the above terms. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) VRJ 3