Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 1909 (BOM)

RAJESH VASANT KINI v. THE EDUCATION OFFICER (SECONDARY) AND ORS

WP/8901/2026 · 2026-08-06

Aarti A Sathe, Shri G S Kulkarni

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.8901 OF 2026 Rajesh Vasant Kini, Age 50 years, R/o.At Tighare, Post Agarwadi, Tal.Palghar, Dist.Palghar. Petitioner versus 1. The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar. 2. The State of Maharshtra 3. The Secretary, Gramin Vidya Viks Vardhini Mandal A/P.Agarwadi, Tal.Palghar. 4. The Principal, Anant Janardhan Vartak Jr.College, A/P.Agarwadi, Tal.Palghar. Respondents _______ Mr.Kashyap Bhalerao for Petitioner. Mrs.Devyani S.Deshmukh, AGP, for Respondent _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & AARTI SATHE, JJ. DATE: 6th August 2026 P.C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed praying for the following sole substantive relief : “a. This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or Direction in the like nature under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, thereby directing the Respondent no.1 to decide the objections and applications filed by the Petitioner against the illegal seniority lists dated 18.11.2024 and 06.11.2025 prepared by the School Management and thereafter to grant the post of Supervisor to the Petitioner with all the consequential benefits in time bound manner by quashing the earlier seniority lists dated 18.11.2024 and 06.11.2025. M.S.Thatte MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Digitally signed by MANISH SURESHRAO THATTE Date: 2026.08.11 14:10:57 +0530 2 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC 2. The only grievance of the Petitioner in the present petition is the non consideration of the pending objections raised by the Petitioner against the illegal seniority list prepared by the management of the school, which is pending disposal. 3. Briefly the facts are as follows. The Petitioner was appointed as Shikshan Sevak (Assistant Teacher) in Anant Janardhan Vartak Junior College run by Gramin Vidya Vikas Vardhini Mandal since 2006. It is the Petitioner’s contention that on 12th June 2006 the Petitioner, by Government Resolution dated 6th May 2014 (No.SSN-1007/(154/07) TNT) and departmental orders, revised the Petitioner’s appointment date to 12th June 2006. On 30th April 2010, the Deputy Director of Education, Mumbai issued approval order of the even date approving his appointment in the pay scale of Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay of Rs.4600/-. 4. It is the Petitioner’s case that on 18th November 2024 and 6th November 2025, the school management prepared two seniority lists and both the seniority lists were illegal and contrary to law as they were not prepared in accordance with Rule 12 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Rules, 1981. Being aggrieved by the said two faulty seniority lists, the Petitioner has filed objections and applications before Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar. It is the Petitioner’s contention that no decision has been taken insofar as pending objections of the Petitioner are concerned by Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar despite issuance of legal notice by the Petitioner dated 20th March 2026. M.S.Thatte 3 of 3 909.WP.8901.2026.DOC 5. It is this inaction on the part of Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Palghar of not deciding the objections of the Petitioner in respect of seniority lists dated 18th November 2024 and 6th November 2025 is what is causing prejudice to the Petitioner. It is incumbent upon Respondent no.1 therefore that the aforesaid objection be decided expeditiously and in a time bound manner. 6. In our view, considering the limited relief that the Petitioner seeks in the petition and although there being no written opposition/reply of the Respondents, considering the nature of the orders we propose to pass, no prejudice would be caused to the Respondents. The following order would serve the ends of justice. ORDER (i) The Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad shall consider and decide the objections and applications filed by the Petitioner against seniority lists dated 18th November 2024 and 6th November 2025 issued by the school management as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of four weeks from the date this order is made available to Respondent no.1 i.e. Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, by the Petitioner; (ii) Let all parties be heard; (iii) All rights and contentions of the parties are expressly kept open; (iv) The writ petition is disposed of in the above terms. No costs. (AARTI SATHE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) M.S.Thatte