1 WP-5568-2026.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.5568 OF 2026 [Shri Prabhu Rajaramji Shaikshanik Sanskrutik Sanstha, Nagpur and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Shri A.Z. Jibhkate with Shri P.A. Jibhkate, Counsel for Petitioners. Ms T.H. Khan, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJNISH R. VYAS , JJ. D ATE : 25 th AUGUST, 2026 1. In the present petition, the following prayers are made : “(i) Declare that the Government Resolution dated 04/04/2025 (Annexure No.3) issued by the Respondent No.1 i.e. The State of Maharashtra, through its Chief Secretary, School Education & Sports Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and the Circular/instructions dated 28/05/2025 (Annexure No.6) issued by the Respondent No.2 i.e. The Director of Education (Secondary & Higher Secondary), State of Maharashtra, Pune-1 so far as retrospective effect of the same is ultra vires and unconstitutional and the same cannot be made applicable to the appointments and approvals in earlier point of time before imposing the ban vide Circular/Instructions dated 28/05/2025, by a suitable and appropriate writ or directions. (ii) Further be pleased to direct Respondent No.1 & 2 i.e. The State of Maharashtra through its Chief Secretary, School Education & Sports Department, Mantralaya Mumbai and The Director of Education (Secondary & Higher Secondary), State of Maharashtra, Pune-1 to take back the proposal of approval and Shalarth from the respective Education Officers, managements and adjudicate upon the same within stipulated period and extend all consequential benefits accrued therefrom, by a suitable and appropriate writ or directions. (iii) By interim writ or directions direct the Respondent No.4 i.e. The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur to grant provisional approval to the appointment of Petitioner No.3 i.e. 2026:BHC-NAG:11272-DB 2 WP-5568-2026.odt Shri Anshil Ramesh Nannaware as a Junior Clerk of Petitioner No.2 Schoool i.e. Rajiv Gandhi Vidyalaya, Masal (Bk), since appointment is made as per the permission after following due procedure against the sanctioned vacant post and Respondent No.3 i.e. The Divisional Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpur may also kindly be directed to include the name of Petitioner No.3 in the Shalarth Pranali, in view of the legal position in field, during the pendency of the present petition, in the interest of justice. (iv) Any other suitable and appropriate interim as well as final relief which may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case may kindly be granted in favour of the Petitioners and against the respondents and kindly allow the petition, in the interest of justice.” 2. Shri A.Z. Jibhkate, learned counsel for the petitioners, points out that the respondent No.1-State has issued the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026 in respect of grant of approval to the appointments of the non-teaching employees and by this Government Resolution, the Government Resolutions, which are under challenge in this petition, viz. Government Resolution dated 4th April, 2025 and Government Resolution dated 28th May, 2025, have been superseded. Accordingly, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Prayer Clause (i) in this petition does not survive. 3. As regards Prayer Clause (ii), Shri Jibhkate, learned counsel, then argues that though the proposal was submitted for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner No.3- Anshil Ramesh Nannaware, the same was not considered and it was communicated by the impugned communication dated 15th June, 2026 issued by the respondent No.4- Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, that since in view of the Government Resolutions dated 4th April, 2025 and 28th May, 2025 there is a stay by the Government to the approval to the 3 WP-5568-2026.odt appointments of non-teaching employees and to include their names in the Shalarth Pranali, the proposal cannot be accepted. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that now the so-called hurdle in deciding the proposal has been removed by the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026, by which the earlier Government Resolutions dated 4th April, 2025 and 28th May, 2025 have been superseded. He, therefore, prays for a direction to reconsider the proposal of the petitioners dated 20th May, 2025 for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner No.3. 5. Ms T.H. Khan, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that in view of subsequent events, i.e. after issuance of the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026, the petitioners shall submit a fresh proposal in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026, and if such proposal is submitted, the respondent-Authorities shall consider it for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner No.3. 6. Shri Jibhkate, learned counsel for the petitioners, however, insisted upon deciding the proposal dated 20th May, 2025. 7. In the circumstances, we are of the opinion that there is no difficulty for the respondents to reconsider the proposal of the petitioners dated 20th May, 2025 for grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner No.3 and take decision in light of the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026, which is issued in relation to the grant of approval to the appointments of the non-teaching employees and by which, the earlier Government Resolutions dated 4th April, 2025 and 28th May, 2025 have been superseded. 8. Accordingly, the respondent No.4- Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, is directed to reconsider the proposal of the 4 WP-5568-2026.odt petitioner dated 20th May, 2025 in light of the Government Resolution dated 11th August, 2026 and if there is any deficiency in the proposal, the same shall be communicated to the petitioners. In case of such communication, the petitioners shall remove the deficiency within two weeks from the date of such communication and on removal of such deficiency, the respondent No.4- Education Officer shall take decision on the proposal of the petitioners dated 20th May, 2025 within three months from today and communicate such decision to the petitioners within two weeks thereafter. 9. The petition is disposed of accordingly. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioners undertakes to communicate this order to the respondent No.4-Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, within one week from today. (RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) LANJEWAR