53-WP-4460-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4460 OF 2024 Surendra Yashwant Khatate ...Petitioner. Versus The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents. —————— Mr. Prashant Bhavake for the Petitioner. Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the Respondents-State. —————— Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh & Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ. Date : September 22, 2026. P. C. : 1. By this petition, the order dated 11th January 2023 passed by the Education Oicer is impugned. By the impugned order, the proposal submitted for appointment of the Petitioner to the aided post of ‘Shikshan Sevak’ came to be rejected on the ground of Government Resolution dated 10th June 2022. 2. The learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner would point out the GR dated 10th June 2022, which directs the private schools to submit the proposals, which were not submitted within the period of three months prior to the issuance of the G.R.. He further points out that Petitioner came to be appointed on 20th December 2022 and the proposal was submitted on 26th December 2022. Gaikwad RD 1 of 3 53-WP-4460-2024.doc 3. The learned AGP would support the impugned order and would submit that the proposal has been rightly rejected. She would further submit that due to COVID-19 pandemic, the Maharashtra State Government’s Finance Department had issued the communication dated 4th May 2020 clearly placing an embargo on any new recruitment. 4. The only reason for rejection of the approval is the G.R. dated 10thJune 2022. Upon perusal of the G.R. dated 10th June 2022, it is evident that the same does not apply to the facts of the present case. The Petitioner has been appointed on 20th December 2022 and within a period of six days, the proposal was duly submitted. Therefore, there is no delay in submission of the proposal. Though in the aidavit an additional ground has been taken, the impugned order cannot be supplemented by the Aidavit-in-reply. 5. As the impugned order is clearly unsustainable, it is hereby quashed and set aside. 6. The proposal is remitted to the ile of the Education Oicer to be considered afresh. It is made clear that as this Court has held that the G.R. dated 10th June 2022 is not applicable, the same should not constitute a ground for rejection of the proposal. 7. The Education Oicer to consider the proposal afresh and if the same is in accordance with law to grant approval. Gaikwad RD 2 of 3 53-WP-4460-2024.doc 8. The entire exercise to be carried out within a period of four weeks from today. 9. In event, the approval is granted, the Respondent No.4-the Deputy Director of Education to include the name of the Petitioner in the shalarth pranali and issue the shalarth ID within a period of two weeks thereafter. The grant-in-aid to be released within a period of two weeks thereafter. 10. The Petition is allowed in 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: 2026.09.22 20:56:27 +0530