15-WP-15872-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 15872 OF 2024 Sagarkumar Yashwant Dadmode And Others ...Petitioners. Versus The State Of Maharashtra Thr The Secretary And Others ...Respondents. —————— Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioners. Mr. R. P. Kadam, B Panel Advocate for the Respondent-State. —————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh & Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ. Date : August 29, 2026. P. C. : 1. Heard learned Advocate for the Petitioner and the learned Advocate for Respondent 1 to 5. 2. The challenge in this writ petition is to the impugned order dated 24.07.2024 passed by Respondent No. 5-Education Oicer, rejecting the proposal for approval to the appointment of the Petitioner No. 1 on the post of Junior Clerk. 3. Petitioner No. 1 was appointed on 01.07.2024 by Petitioner No. 2 (Management). The Petitioner No. 3 Headmaster, submitted the proposal for approval by communication dated 16.07.2024, which came to be rejected by Respondent No. 5 (Education Oicer) by pointing out Harish 1 of 4 HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Digitally signed by HARISH VITHAL CHAUDHARI Date: 2026.09.01 10:11:57 +0530 15-WP-15872-2024.doc certain deiciencies. 4. It is submitted by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner that the deiciency mentioned in para ive (5) of the impugned order in fact cannot be a deiciency. He submits that the Government Resolution and Government Circular referred in para ive (5) of the impugned order were the subject matter of a challenge before this Court in Writ Petition No. 5058 of 2021, which came to be decided on 06.02.2024 and on the submissions of the learned Advocate General, this Court accepted the interpretation by the Advocate General. According to learned Advocate for the Petitioners, no opportunity was given to the Petitioners before rejecting the said proposal. He submits that if the matter is remanded back, the Petitioners would put forth their case and appropriate order thereafter can be passed. 5. The learned AGP submits that, if the matter is remanded back, the same would be reconsidered by giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners. 6. We have gone through the said order dated 06.02.2024 at page No. 54. The said order indicate that, the Government Resolution and Government Circular referred in para ive (5) of the impugned order were not set aside. The said Government Resolution and Government Circular stand as on date. Perusal of the impugned order shows that, there is just reference of the said Government Resolution and the Harish 2 of 4 15-WP-15872-2024.doc Government Circular in para ive (5). The para six (6) of the impugned order shows that, Respondent No. 5 has observed that, the staing pattern was not approved. Para seven (7) of the impugned order shows the proposal was not submitted as per the checklist. 7. There is no dispute that, the order impugned is passed behind the back of Petitioners and the Petitioners were not aforded an opportunity to comply with the deiciencies pointed in the impugned order. Under such circumstances, it would just and proper to remand the matter for reconsideration by the Respondent No. 5-Education Oicer. 8. In view of the above, we proceed to pass the following order: a) The impugned order passed by Respondent No. 5, Education Oicer, is quashed and set aside to the extent it rejects the proposal for approval to the Petitioner No. 1’s appointment. b) The proposal is restored to the ile of Respondent No. 5, Education Oicer. c) Respondent No. 5, Education Oicer, shall reconsider the same by giving an opportunity to the Petitioners to comply with the deiciencies. d) The Petitioner shall appear before Respondent No. 5, Education Oicer, within a period of two weeks from today. e) Thereafter, the appropriate order shall be passed by Harish 3 of 4 15-WP-15872-2024.doc the Respondent No. 5- Education Oicer within a period of four weeks, thereafter. f) In the event of approval to the proposal by the Respondent No. 5-Education Oicer, the name of Petitioner No.1 shall be included in the Shalarth Pranali and issue a Shalarth ID and consequential beneit to be extended to the Petitioner No. 1, including the arrears of his salary, if any, as per rules. 9. Writ Petition stands disposed of. [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.] Harish 4 of 4