14 WP 10212-24.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 10212 OF 2024 Jibhau Zipru Borse ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents _______ Mr. Sanjeev Deore a/w Suchita Pawar, Aditya Deore, Arman Ansari, Shamshad Ali for Petitioner. Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl.G.P. a/w V. G. Bagujar, AGP for Respondent-State. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 27 JULY 2026 P.C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following substantive reliefs:- “(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Art 226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate directions/writ/order whereby quashing and setting aside the 08.02.2024. AND/OR (b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Art 226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate directions/writ/order whereby directing the Respondent No-2 to grant/accord approval to the Petitioner as Head master on permanent basis w.e.f. 01.10.2022. AND/OR (c) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Art 226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate directions/writ/order whereby directing the Respondent No-1 and 2 to put the Petitioner on the pay scale of Head master and grant him the salary on the scale of Head master w.e.f. 01.10.2022 and thereafter to pay the arrears of the Petitioner as Head master w.e.f. 01.10.2022.” Bharati 14 WP 10212-24.DOC 2. Although, the Petitioner has prayed for quashing and setting aside of the order dated 8th February 2024 passed by Respondent No.2- Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Nashik, whereby Respondent No.2- Education Officer has granted temporary approval to the Petitioner’s Appointment as a Headmaster instead of permanent approval, the relief which the Petitioner seeks today with respect to the pension which is due to the Petitioner, who has retired on 31 st May 2026. 3. It is the Petitioner's contention that, on account of the dispute within the Respondent No. 3 - Management/School, the proposal for sanction of the Petitioner's pensionary benefits has not been forwarded by the Respondent No. 3 - School to the concerned statutory authorities. In view thereof, it is the Petitioner’s contention that the said proposal be sent to the concerned authorities i.e. Respondent No.2 - Education Officer. 4. The limited facts in the present Petition are that on 14th June 1993, the Petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher in Respondent No.3- Management/School with effect from the said date and was granted approval as Assistant Teacher by Respondent No.2- Education Officer on 30th September 1993. On 1st October 2022, the Petitioner was promoted as the Headmaster in accordance with the seniority list upon the retirement of the erstwhile Headmaster on 30th September 2022. Thereafter, on various occasions during the years 2023 and 2024, the Petitioner requested Respondent No. 2- Education Officer to grant permanent approval to his appointment as Headmaster. However, as noted above, Bharati 14 WP 10212-24.DOC Respondent No. 2 continued to grant only temporary approval and did not accord permanent approval. 5. In view of the fact that the Petitioner retired from service on 31st May 2026, the only surviving grievance in the present petition pertains to the forwarding of the Petitioner's pension proposal by the Respondent No. 3 - Management/School, to the competent authority, namely Respondent No. 2-Education Officer, for processing and sanctioning the Petitioner's pensionary benefits. 6. In view of the limited relief prayed by the Petitioner in the present petition and although there being no written opposition/reply of the Respondents and considering the nature of the orders which we propose to pass, no prejudice would be caused to the Respondents. The following order would serve the ends of justice: - ORDER i. Respondent No.3- Management/School is directed to send the pension proposal of the Petitioner to Respondent No.2 as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from the date this order is made available to the said Respondent by the Petitioner. We have not examined any other issue. ii. Let all the parties be heard. iii. All rights and contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. iv. The petition is disposed of accordingly. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) Bharati