37-WP-7002-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 7002 OF 2024 Mandar Mangesh Tendolkar ...Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents. —————— Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioner. Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP for the Respondents-State. —————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh & Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ. Date : August 19, 2026. P. C. : 1. By the present petition, the challenge is to the order dated 5th of April 2023, passed by the Education Oicer, noting deiciency in the proposal submitted by the Respondent-Management for seeking approval to the appointment of the Petitioner. 2. The Petitioner claims to have been appointed against a vacancy being created by reason of retirement of the Assistant Teacher on 30th September 2019. On 3rd June 2022, the Respondent No.6-Educational Institution intimated the vacant posts and sought permission from the Respondent No.5-Education Oicer for issuance of advertisement, which came to be refused on 13th July 2022, in view of the Pavitra Portal recruitment process being implemented through Government Resolution dated 23rd June 2017. Gaikwad RD 1 of 3 37-WP-7002-2024.doc 3. The Petitioner claims that as the Pavitra Portal was not functional at the relevant time, advertisement was published by the Respondent No.6 to which the Petitioner applied and was selected. The appointment order was issued on 5th August 2022 to the Petitioner and on 29th March 2023, the Headmaster of the Respondent No.7-School submitted the proposal for individual approval to the appointment of the Petitioner, which came to be rejected by the impugned order dated 9th May 2023. 4. We have perused the impugned order dated 9th May 2023, which rejects the proposal by citing certain deiciencies. Upon perusal of the order, it is evident that no opportunity was given to the Management to comply with the deiciencies set out in the impugned order dated 9th May 2023. 5. Mr. Bhavake would submit that the issue of the non-functioning of the Pavitra Portal is settled by various decisions of this Court and despite thereof, the Education Oicer disregards the said decisions. Learned AGP-Mr. Kalel would submit that the Honb’le Apex Court is seized of the matter of Pavitra Portal. 6. The Management is required to be given an opportunity of complying with the deiciencies cited in the order dated 9th May 2023, before the rejection of the proposal. 7. It is open for the parties to submit the judicial pronouncements Gaikwad RD 2 of 3 37-WP-7002-2024.doc for consideration of the Education Oicer, who shall decide the application in accordance with the judicial pronouncements. 8. To the extent that the impugned order rejects the proposal of the Petitioner the order is set aside. The Management is directed to comply with the deiciencies within a period of three weeks from today. 9. Upon deiciencies being complied with, the Education Oicer to decide the application, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all parties. 10. The Petition is allowed in the above terms. [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.] Gaikwad RD 3 of 3 RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Digitally signed by RAJU DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD Date: 2026.08.19 20:53:20 +0530