Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20355 (BOM)

SHRADDHA KEDAR ATHAVALE v. THE EDUCATION OFFICER ( SECONDARY) ZILLA PARISHAD THANE AND ORS

WP/13338/2026 · 2026-10-12

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

407_WP_13338_2026.DOCX Prasad IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.13338 OF 2026 Shraddha Kedar Athavale ...Petitioner Versus The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad Thane And Ors ...Respondents _______ Mr Kashyap Bhalerao, for the Petitioner Ms M. Kajale, ‘B’ Panel counsel, with Ms N.M. Mehra, AGP, for the Respondents. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE: 12th OCTOBER 2026 P.C. 1. Heard Mr Kashyap Bhalerao, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and Ms M. Kajale, learned Advocate, representing the State. 2. By this Writ Petition, the Petitioner seeks a direction to Respondent No.1- Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Thane, to decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 08.09.2026 made by her seeking approval of her appointment as a ‘Junior Clerk’. 3. The Petitioner was appointed as a ‘Junior Clerk’ in G.E.I.’s New High School, Kalyan, from 13.10.2022. Thereafter, the School sent a proposal dated 19.11.2022 to Respondent No. 1, the Education Officer, seeking approval for the Petitioner’s appointment; however, the same was rejected by order dated 29.11.2022, raising certain objections. Aggrieved, the Petitioner and the School approached this Court by way of a Writ Petition bearing No. 16312 of 2023. By 407_WP_13338_2026.DOCX order dated 29.04.2024, this Court directed that the order dated 29.11.2022 be treated as notice of the proposed grounds for rejection to the Petitioner and the School; revived the proposal dated 19.11.2022; and directed the Education Officer to decide the said proposal after considering the explanation to the proposed objections, government resolutions, etc. 4. As per the directions of this Court, a hearing took place on 05.07.2024, during which Respondent No. 1-Education Officer again raised objections. After addressing all objections, the school submitted a revised proposal dated 06.05.2025, which Respondent No. 1 rejected by order dated 06.12.2025, raising certain queries. The Petitioner therefore made another representation dated 08.09.2026 to Respondent No. 1-Education Officer, replying to the queries raised earlier. 5. Considering the averments made in the Petition and the reliefs sought, we deem it necessary to direct the Respondent No.1-Education Officer to hear and decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 08.09.2026 within a period of 4 weeks from today, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all the concerned parties. 6. Keeping all the contentions open in that regard, the Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Digitally signed by PRASAD RAJENDRASING RAJPUT Date: 2026.10.16 11:15:29 +0530