All Writ Petition (Civil)

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 4: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 5: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 6: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 7: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 10: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde & Ors. .. Petitioners Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. .. Respondents … … Ms. Priyanka Chavan for the petitioners. Mr. K.V. Saste, A.P.P. for respondent-State. CORAM: S.S. SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED : 08TH FEBRUARY, 2021. P.C:- Stand over to 09/02/2021. (MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 12: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Appearances of the Advocates as per Board dated 09/02/2021. … CORAM: S.S. SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED : 09TH FEBRUARY, 2021. P.C:- Matters at serial numbers mentioned below of the Board stands discharged and will be taken first on 10th February, 2021, followed by the matters from the Causelist dated 10th February, 2021. Sr. Nos. Due Date 32, 35 to 41, 43 to 46, 48 to 51, 54 to 60, 62 to 74, 76, 77, 78, 80, 81 10-02-2021 Ad-interim /interim reliefs, if any, to continue till then. (MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 14: 31_wp.486.2021.doc Vishwanath S. Sherla Digitally signed by Vishwanath S. Sherla Date: 2021.02.10 17:14:35 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde & another … Petitioners Vs. State of Maharashtra & others … Respondents Ms.Priyanka Chavan for the Petitioners Mr.K.V. Saste, APP, for Respondent – State CORAM: S.S. SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED: FEBRUARY 10, 2021 P.C.: At the request of the learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners, stand over to Monday, the 15th February, 2021 . (MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 16: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL / CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.291 OF 2021 (Sr.No.66) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.385 OF 2021 (Sr.No.67) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.402 OF 2021 (Sr.No.68) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.457 OF 2021 (Sr.No.69) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 (Sr.No.70) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL INTERIM APPLICATION NO.519 OF 2021 (Sr.No.71) IN CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO 333/2021 ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.540 OF 2021 (Sr.No.73) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.554 OF 2021 (Sr.No.74) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.575 OF 2021 (Sr.No.75) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 581 OF 2021 (Sr.No.76) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.617 OF 2021 (Sr.No.77) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.618 OF 2021 (Sr.No.78) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.639 OF 2021(Sr.No.83) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.643 OF 2021 (Sr.No.85) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.644 OF 2021 (Sr.No.86) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.645 OF 2021 (Sr.No.87) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.646 OF 2021 (Sr.No.88) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.648 OF 2021 (Sr.No.90) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.652 OF 2021(Sr.No.92) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.653 OF 2021 (Sr.No.93) ALONG WITH CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.660 OF 2021 (Sr.No.94) Appearances of the Advocates as per Board dated 15/02/2021. CORAM: S.S. SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED : 15TH FEBRUARY, 2021. P.C:- Due to paucity of time, the board is discharged for the day and the above matters are adjourned to 16/02/2021. Interim relief or ad-interim relief, if any in the above matters to continue till then. (MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 18: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde & Anr. .. Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents … Mr.Robin Fernandes i/b Ms.Priyanka Chavan for the Petitioners. Dr.F.R.Shaikh, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : S.S.SHINDE & MANISH PITALE, JJ. DATED : 16th FEBRUARY, 2021 P.C:- Learned APP submits that the concerned police officer had made sincere efforts to trace out the missing person, namely, Atul Ankush Shinde. However, the concerned police officer could not trace him out. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the Investigating Agency, CID, Pune is having specialised police personnel to conduct the investigation. We are satisfied with the inquiry/investigation conducted by the concerned police officer. However, since the Investigating Agency, CID, Pune is a specialised agency, we deem it appropriate to direct respondent No.2 to entrust further inquiry/investigation with the Investigating Agency, CID, Pune forthwith. List this petition on 8th March, 2021. (MANISH PITALE, J.) (S.S.SHINDE, J.) M.M.Salgaonkar Digitally signed by Mandira Salgaonkar Date: 2021.02.17 20:52:26 +0530

Order - Status 20: (35) cri.wp-486.21.odt Laxmikant G. Chandan Digitally signed by Laxmikant G. Chandan Date: 2021.03.10 10:39:54 +0530 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde and anr. : Petitioners. Versus The State of Maharashtra and ors. : Respondents. Ms. Priyanka Chavan for the Petitioner. Dr. F R Shaikh, APP for the Respondent/State. CORAM : S. S. SHINDE, MANISH PITALE, JJ DATE : 09th MARCH 2021 P.C. 1 Dr. F R Shaikh, the learned APP appearing for the Respondent/State, on instructions, submits that inquiry/investigation is transferred to CID Branch, State of Maharashtra. He, therefore, prays two weeks time so as to enable him to take instructions. At his request, stand over to 05/04/2021. [MANISH PITALE, J] [S. S. SHINDE , J]

Order - Status 22: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde And Ors. PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. RESPONDENT Smt. Priyanka Chavan for Petitioner Dr. F. R. Shaikh, APP for Respondent - State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANISH PITALE, JJ DATE : 5th April, 2021 P.C. : At the request of the learned APP for the Respondent - State, S.O. to 21/04/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 24: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde And Ors. PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. RESPONDENT CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 27th July, 2021 P.C. : Balance Daily Board cannot be taken up today on account of paucity of time. Stand over to 03/08/2021 . Ad-interim relief or interim relief, if any, granted earlier will continue to operate till next date. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 26: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde And Ors. PETITIONER V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr. RESPONDENT PRIYANKA CHAVAN for Petitioner. Mrs. M. H. Mahatare, APP for Respondent/State. CORAM : HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE S.S. SHINDE & HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE N. J. JAMADAR, JJ DATE : 3rd August, 2021 P.C. : S. O. to 04/08/2021 . ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 28: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde and Anr. ...Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents SUBHASH PAREKAR Digitally signed by VISHAL SUBHASH PAREKAR Date: 2021.08.05 10:31:28 +0530 VISHAL Ms. Priyanka Chavan, for the Petitioner Mrs. M.H. Mhatre, APP for the Respondent-State. CORAM : S. S. SHINDE & N. J. JAMADAR, JJ. DATE : AUGUST 04, 2021 P.C.: . Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Mrs. Mhatre, learned APP, on instruction, seeks time to carry out further investigation so as to trace out the missing person. Ms. Chavan, learned counsel for the petitioner states that she is not averse to granting time to the investigating agency. At the request of learned APP list on 21st September, 2021. (N. J. JAMADAR, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)

Order - Status 30: WRIT PETITION NO. 486 OF 2021 Amol Ankush Shinde & Anr. ...Petitioners vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents Ms.Priyanka Chavan for Petitioners. Ms.A.S. Pai, PP for State. CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ. DATED : 2 FEBRUARY 2022 P.C. : . At the request of learned PP, three weeks time is granted to submit report to this court. S.O. to 23 February 2022. (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) (PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

Order - Status 5: R. B. Bohora Educational & Welfare Trust .. Petitioner -versus Vijay. V Mundaware .. Respondent. Mr. C.G. Gavnekar, for the Petitioner. S. N. Bhosle, AGP for respondent No.9. CORAM: R.V. MORE, J. DATED: 22nd July, 2010 P.C. vks Issue Notice before admission, returnable on 23.8.2010. In the meanwhile there shall be interim reliefs in terms of prayer clause (c). (R. V. MORE, J.)

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET WRIT PETITION NO.5595 OF 2010 1 ............................................................. Office Notes,Office memorandum of Coram, appearances,Court's Court's or orders or directions Judge's orders & Registrar's orders. ............................................................. Mr.Suhas Deokar i/b Mr.C.G.Gavnekar for the petitioner Mr.R.M.Patne ,A.G.P for the respondent No.9 CORAM: A.S.OKA,J. DATE : AUGUST 23,2010 P.C.: 1 Await service till 17th September 2010. In the meanwhile, Advocate for the petitioner will serve private notice to the respondent Nos.1 to 8. If Affidavit of service is not filed on or before 15th September 2010, Petition will stand dismissed for non prosecution without further reference to the Court. Ad-interim relief granted earlier to continue till further orders. JUDGE

Order - Status 11: FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 5595 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office memorandum of Coram, appearances, Court's Court's or orders or directions & Judge's orders. Registrar's orders. Shri C.G. Gavnekar for the Petitioner. Shri J. Shekhar i/;by M/s. J. Shekhar & Co. for Respondent Nos.1, 3 and 4. Shri Suhas S. Deokar for Respondent Nos. 5 to 8. Shri Suresh Bhosale, AGP for the Respondent No.9. CORAM : A.S.OKA, J. DATE : 14TH OCTOBER, 2010 P.C.: . Heard Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st , 3 rd and 4th Respondents. Heard learned AGP for Respondent No.9. The impugned order has been passed in purported exercise of powers under Section 41A of the Bombay Public Trusts act, 1950. Considering the scope of Section 41A of the said Act, prima facie, it appears that the impugned order could not have been passed in exercise of the said power. Rule. There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (d). Ash Notwithstanding pendency of this petition and grant of interim relief, it will be open for the parties to take action in accordance with law. (A.S.OKA, J)

Order - Status 3: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.3630 OF 2020 Dilip Nivrutti Jadhav .… Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3631 OF 2020 Santosh Bapurao Raut .… Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3632 OF 2020 Dhanaji Tanaji Jagtap .… Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3633 OF 2020 Smt. Jayashree Pandurang Inje .… Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. …. Respondents …. Mr. Narendra V. Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners in all the petitions. Mr. S.H. Kankal AGP in all the Petitions. CORAM : SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED: 14th DECEMBER, 2020. P.C.:- Stand over to 18/12/2020. To be listed alongwith WPST/97958/ 2020, WPST/97960/2020, WPST/97957/2020, WPST/98064/2020 and WPST/98059/2020. Petitioners to serve Respondent No.3 in all the aforesaid petitions by private service. Reply, if any, to be fled before the next date. This order will be digitally signed by the Private Secretary/Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) Megha Parab Digitally signed by Megha Parab Date: 2020.12.15 16:28:38 +0530

Order - Status 6: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3630 OF 2020 Dilip Nivrutti Jadhav ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3632 OF 2020 Dhanaji Tanaji Jagtap ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3631 OF 2020 Santosh Bapurao Raut ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3633 OF 2020 Jayashree Pandurang Inje ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.97958 OF 2020 Prajakta Sachin Lamkane ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.97960 OF 2020 Sohani Buwasaheb Gunjawate ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.97957 OF 2020 Vijaymala Subhash Mane ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.98064 OF 2020 Santosh Shankar Padvi ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (ST.) NO.98059 OF 2020 Kishor Dattatraya Mandhare ….Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. …. Respondents Mr. Narendra V. Bandiwadekar a/w. Mr. Vinayak Kumbhar i/b. Mrs. Ashwini Navjyot Bandiwadekar for the Petitioners. Mr. Sagar Mane for Respondent No.3 (Management). Mr. S.H. Kankal, AGP for the State in WP/3630/2020, WPST/98064/2020 and WPST/98059/2020. Mr. P.P. Pujari, AGP for the State in WP/3632/2020. Mr. C.D. Mali, AGP for the State WP/3631/2020. Mr. S.D. Rayrikar, AGP for the State in WP/3633/2020. Mr. A.B. Kadam, AGP for the State in WPST/97958/2020. Mr. P.V. Nelson Rajan, AGP for the State in WPST/97960/2020. Mrs. M.S. Bane, AGP for the State in WPST/97957/2020. CORAM: SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J. DATED : 18th DECEMBER, 2020. JUDGMENT :- . Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With consent, the Petitions are taken up for final hearing at the stage of admission. The Petitioners herein have challenged the order of approval dated 09/01/2019 whereby the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Satara – Respondent No.2 has granted approval to the transfer of the Petitioners from un-aided to aided post as Shikshan Sevaks on monthly honorarium. The Petitioner – Kishor Dattatraya Mandhare (Writ Petition (St.) No.98059/2020) has also challenged the order dated 22/09/2020 issued by the Respondent No.4 – Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Region, rejecting permission to Respondent No.3 – Management to include the name of the Petitioner of the said Petition in Shalartha Pranali in the post of clerk in pay scale. Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar, learned counsel for the Petitioners submits that the Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers / Junior Clerk on unaided schools/posts and that their appointments were approved by the Education Officer. He submits that the Petitioners have put in more than three years of service and as such, the Education Officer was not justified in granting approval to their transfer as Shikhan Sevaks on monthly honorarium, but ought to have granted approval to the transfer as Assistant Teachers / Junior Clerk in pay scale. In support of this contention, he has relied upon the decisions of the Division Bench of this Court in Ms. Sandhya Laxman Ghosalkar v/s. The State of Maharashtra and others in Writ Petition No.5258 of 2012 along with connected writ petitions, Pramod s/o. Prabhakar Pokale v/s. State of Maharashtra and others, 2019 (4) Mh.L.J. 278 and Miss. Devkar Dipali Kisan and ors. v/s. The State of Maharashtra and ors. in Writ Petition No. 5313 of 2017. Mr. Bandiwadekar, learned counsel for the Petitioner further submits that the Petitioner - Kishor Dattatraya Mandhare [Writ Petition (St.) No.98059/2020] was appointed on 15/06/2013 and as such, the Respondent No.4 could not have declined permission to include his name in Shalartha Pranali in the post of Junior Clerk in the pay scale on the basis of subsequent Government Resolutions dated 12/02/2015 and 07/03/2019. Learned AGP submits that the Management has transferred the Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks and submitted the proposals for approval of the transfer of the Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks. He, therefore, contends that the Education Officer was justified in granting approval to their transfers as Shikshan Sevaks on monthly honorarium. Learned counsel for Respondent No.3 states that the Petitioners herein had completed more than 3 years of service and that they were the senior most Teachers/Junior Clerk in the respective schools. He states that in view of sub-clause 5(A) of clause (3) of Government Circular dated 28/06/2016, the Petitioners were transferred as Shikshan Sevaks and not as Assistant Teachers. He submits that the Management was not aware of the decisions of this Court in Pramod s/o. Prabhakar Pokale (supra) and Miss. Devkar Dipali Kisan and ors. (supra). He submits that the Education Officer who was aware of the said decisions, ought to have granted approval to the transfer as Assistant Teachers in pay scale. I have perused the records and considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsels for the respective parties. It is not in dispute that the Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers / Junior Clerk in un-aided schools/posts after following the prescribed procedure. Their appointments were approved by the Education Officer on un-aided basis. By afflux of time, vacancies were available in aided schools/posts run by the same Management. Considering the seniority of these Petitioners, the Management issued transfer orders transferring them from un-aided schools/posts to aided schools/posts. Upon being relieved from the un-aided schools/posts, these Assistant Teachers/Junior Clerk joined duty on aided schools/posts. The Headmasters of respective Schools submitted proposals to the Education Officer for approval to the transfer of the Petitioners from the date of the transfer. By the impugned order, the Education Officer has granted approval to the transfer of the Petitioners from un-aided schools/posts to aided schools/posts as Shikshan Sevaks / Junior Clerk on monthly honorarium. The only question which arises in these Petitions is whether the Education Officer was justified in approving the transfer of the Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks on monthly honorarium. It may be mentioned that in Ms. Sandhya Ghosalkar (supra), the Petitioners who were appointed as Assistant Teachers on un-aided basis, were transferred to an aided school run by the same Management. The said Petitioners had challenged the approval by the Education Officer as Shikshan Sevak. While allowing the Petition, the Dviision Bench of this Court has held that there was no justification whatsosever for the Education Officer (Secondary) to grant his approval as Shikshan Sevak to the three Petitioners. It was observed that if the Petitioners had been appointed as Assistant Teachers in the aided School by transfer from the un-aided School on the basis of seniority, the approval ought to have been granted to them as Assistant Teachers. Accordingly, directions were given to the Education Officer to grant approval to the appointments of the Petitioners as the Assistant Teachers. Subsequent to the decision in Ms. Sandhya Ghosalkar, the Government issued a Circular dated 28/06/2016. Sub-clause 5(A) of clause 3 of the said Circular stipulates that when the Management proposes to transfer a Teacher, who has rendered less than 5 years service on un-aided basis, an undertaking should be obtained from such Teacher to work as Shikshan Sevak for three years on consolidated basis. In Pramod Prabhakar Pokale (supra), the Division Bench of this Court while considering the validity of the circular dated 28/06/2016 and in particular sub-clause 5(A) of clause (3), has held thus :- " Upon careful perusal of sub clause 5 (A) of clause 3 of the said Circular, it is mentioned therein that, if the teacher appointed on unaided basis, has rendered less than 5 years service, and in case the management wishes to make such transfer from unaided school to aided school, in that case, an undertaking should be obtained from such teacher to work as Shikshan Sevak on consolidated pay. Prima facie said provision appears to be attractive, however, in case candidate is appointed on the post of Assistant Teacher after following the mandate of Section 5 of the MEPS Act, 1977, and on completion of two years probation period, if the Education Officer has granted approval to his appointment on regular basis, and in case he is senior most teacher serving in the school on unaided basis run by the Institution, requests for his transfer from unaided school to aided school or on aided post from unaided post in same school, and if he has already completed 3 years period as Assistant Teacher, there is no justifiable reason to ask him to work again as Shikshan Sevak on consolidated pay for three years. The sub clause 5 (A) of clause 3 of the said Circular can be invoked wherein the Assistant Teacher has not completed three years period after his appointment as an Assistant Teacher in the school on unaided basis, and he has not received approval to his services as an Assistant Teacher on regular basis. In short, if the Assistant Teacher has not completed satisfactory probation period, and if his service or services are not approved by the Education Officer on regular basis or there is no adherence to the provisions of Section 5 of the MEPS Act, 1977, in that case, the management is not entitled to transfer such teacher from an unaided school to aided school or on aided post of Assistant Teacher / Shikshan Sevak from unaided post held by the Assistant Teacher. It is only in case where the Assistant Teacher has acquired status of regular employee on completion of two years probation period, and his appointment is in adherence to the provisions of Section 5 of the MEPS Act, 1977, and the approval is granted by the Education Officer to his appointment on regular basis on the post of Assistant Teacher on completion of satisfactory probation period, and he is senior most teacher working in the school on unaided basis, in that case, the question of invoking sub clause 5 (A) of Clause 3 of the said Circular would not arise. In such case, invoking said provision would run contrary to the judgment of the Division Bench [Coram : Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud and A.A.Sayed, JJ.] of the Bombay High Court at Principal Seat in the case of Ms.Sandhya Laxman Ghosalkar (supra), wherein it is observed in para 4 that, there was no justification whatsoever for the Education Officer (Secondary) to grant his approval only as Shikshan Sevaks to the three Petitioners. It is further observed that, if the Petitioners had been appointed as Assistant Teachers in the aided school by transfer from the unaided school on the basis of seniority, the approval ought to have been granted to them as Assistant Teachers. This is especially so having due regard to the fact that they were similarly circumstanced with other Teachers in whose case approval was granted as Assistant Teachers. " In Miss. Devkar Dipali Kisan (supra), the challenge was to the rejection of the proposal for transfer of services from un-aided section to aided section. The Division Bench of this Court, upon considering the earlier judgments has reiterated that the transfer of a Teacher from unaided post to aided post is permissible in law. It has been held that sub-clauses (1) and (2) of clause (3) of Government Resolution dated 28/06/2016, which impose a ban on appointment till absorption of surplus Teachers, is contrary to the view taken by the various Division Benches of this Court. The Division Bench has further held that Circular dated 28/06/2016 which provides for those instructions has no statutory force in law and that administrative decisions which run contrary to the subordinate legislation are not valid in law. In the instant case, the Petitioners were appointed as Assistant Teachers / Junior Clerk on substantive posts after following the prescribed selection procedure. These Assistant Teachers / Junior Clerk are duly qualified and their appointments have been approved by the Education Officer. Taking into consideration their seniority and services rendered by them on un-aided basis, the Management transferred them from unaided schools/posts to vacant sanctioned post in aided schools/posts run by the same Management. The transfer was effected as Shikhan Sevaks mainly on the basis of sub-clause 5(A) of clause (3) of circular dated 28/06/2016. As it has been held in Pramod Pokale (supra), sub-clause 5(A) of clause (3) of Circular, could have been invoked only when the Assistant Teachers had not completed three years period after his appointment as Assistant Teachers on un-aided basis and he had not received approval of his services as an Assistant Teacher on regular basis. In the instant case, it is not in dispute that the Petitioners had completed their probation period. They had rendered service in unaided schools/posts for more than three years and that the Education Officer had approved their appointment on un-aided basis in the pay scale. Hence, there was no justification to appoint the Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks on monthly honorarium. Appointment of these Petitioners as Shikshan Sevaks would adversely impact their seniority and deprive them of monetary benefits. It is further to be noted that the Petitioner – Kishor Dattatraya Mandhare was appointed as Junior Clerk on un-aided basis vide appointment order dated 12/06/2013. The Petitioner joined the said un-aided post on 15/06/2013. The Education Officer had granted approval to his appointment as Junior Clerk in pay scale on un-aided basis. He was transferred on a sanctioned post on aided basis which had fallen vacant due to retirement of one Madhukar Khuntale. Since the appointment of this Petitioner was prior to the issuance of circular dated 12/02/2015, the Respondent No.4 was not justified in refusing permission to the Management to include his name in Shalartha Pranali. Under the circumstances and in view of discussion supra, the impugned order cannot be sustained. Hence, the following order :- (a) The Writ Petitions are allowed. (b) The impugned orders dated 09/01/2019 whereby the Education Officer granted approval to the transfer of the Petitioners from unaided post to aided post as Shikshan Sevaks on monthly honorarium, are quashed and set-aside. (c) The Education Officer in respective Petitions is directed to issue a revised order granting approval to the transfer of the Petitioners as Assistant Teacher / Junior Clerk in pay scale w.e.f. the date of their transfer with further directions to release grant-in-aid for payment of salary to the Petitioners in the pay scale applicable to their post from the date of transfer. (d) The impugned order dated 22/09/2020 issued by Respondent No.4 – The Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Region, Kolhapur in Writ Petition (St.) No.98059/2020 is also quashed and set-aside. (e) The Respondent No.4 is directed to grant permission to Respondent No.3 to include the name of the Petitioner – Kishor Dattatraya Mandhare [Writ Petition (St.) No.98059/2020] in Shalartha Pranali in the post of Junior Clerk in pay scale in the aided school. (f) The above exercise shall be completed within a period of six weeks from the date of uploading of this order. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs. This order shall be digitally signed by the Private Secretary / Personal Assistant of this Court. All concerned will act on production by fax or email of a digitally signed copy of this order. (SMT. ANUJA PRABHUDESSAI, J.) Jayani Digitally signed by Preeti H. Jayani Date: 2021.01.04 13:13:19 +0530 Preeti H.

Order - Status 4: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 8088 OF 2022 Dnyanprakash Wabayya Sanepagolu ...Petitioner vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ...Respondents ***** Mr. Rahul Vijaymane - Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. Prasad Kulkarni – Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 Shri V. M. Mali - AGP for the Respondent-State Mr. Abhinav Bhatkar i/by Mr. Vijay Killedar – Advocate for Respondent No. 3. ***** CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. M. MODAK, JJ. DATE : 11th JULY, 2022 P. C. :- Learned counsel for the Petitioner claims that Petitioner is working as untrained teacher since the year 1996. Approval has been granted to the initial appointment of the Petitioner under Order dated 17/08/2004 for a period of three years from 01/06/2003. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner is still working with Respondent-institution, the Respondents are now trying to fill in post. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 25/07/2022. Mr. V. M. Mali, learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent No. 1. Mr. Abhinav Bhatkar, learned counsel appears for Respondent No. 3. Mr. Prasad Kulkarni, learned counsel appears for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. Hamdast is allowed. Stand over to 25/07/2022. [S. M. MODAK, J.] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.]

Order - Status 7: 119.wp8088.2022.doc WRIT PETITION NO. 8088 OF 2022 Dnyanprakash Wabayya Sanepagolu. …Petitioner. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents. Mr. Rahul B. Vijaymane, for Petitioner. Mr. N.C. Walimbe, AGP for State. Mr. Prasad Kulkarni, for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5. CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA & MADHAV J. JAMDAR, JJ. DATED : JULY 25, 2022 P.C. : ARUNA S TALWALKAR Digitally signed by ARUNA S TALWALKAR 2022.07.27 15:47:42 +0530 Learned Counsel for the respondent Nos. 4 and 5 appears. In view that, matter to proceed. (MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J)

Order - Status 5: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.268 OF 2019 (Malhari Tulshiram Sadafule Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another) Office Notes, Office Court's or Judge's orders Memoranda of Coram, appearances,Court's orders, or directions, and Registrar's Orders Ms Manisha Devkar for Petitioner. CORAM : R. G. KETKAR, J. DATE : 28TH FEBRUARY, 2019 P.C.: Not on Board. At the request of Ms Devkar, learned Counsel for the petitioner, taken up in the production Board. Respondent No.2 had filed proceedings under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.') before the trial Court. By order dated 12.04.2010, maintenance @ Rs.1,300/- per month with effect from 10.06.2008 was awarded to the respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 thereafter filed proceedings under Section 127 of Cr.P.C. for enhancing the maintenance amount. By order dated 30.05.2016, the learned Judge, Family Court No.3, Mumbai allowed the Petition and directed the petitioner herein to pay enhanced maintenance @ Rs.12,000/- per month to the respondent No.2 from the date of the Petition i.e. 17.04.2014. Ms Devkar, on instructions, states that petitioner has paid the maintenance from 17.04.2014 till June, 2018 @ Rs.12,000/- per month as per the order dated 30.05.2016. From July, 2018 onwards, he has not paid the maintenance as he has filed proceedings for cancelling the maintenance amount from 30.04.2018 on the ground that petitioner has attained superannuation. On instructions, she further states that before the next date of hearing, petitioner will deposit the arrears of maintenance of Rs.84,000/- (from July 2018 to 28.02.2019 @ Rs.12,000/- per month) in this Court. In view thereof, list the Petition for 'admission' on 14.03.2019 in the Supplementary Board. Till next date, subject to the petitioner depositing Rs.84,000/- in this Court before the next date of hearing, order dated 04.12.2018 issuing distress warrant against the petitioner herein is stayed. No coercive steps shall be taken against the petitioner till next date. It is further made clear that in case the petitioner does not deposit arrears within the stipulated time, this protection shall stand vacated without further reference to the Court. (R. G. KETKAR, J.) Minal Parab

Order - Status 7: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 268 OF 2019 Malhari Tulshiram Sadafule ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent Manisha Arjun Devkar For Petitioner CORAM : RAJESH G. KETKAR, J DATE : 14th March, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 28/03/2019 on supplementary board. In the meantime, Ad-interim relief if any, granted earlier to continue. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 9: IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CR. WRIT PETITION NO. 268 OF 2019 Malhari Tulshiram Sadafule ....Petitioner V/S The State Of Maharashtra And Anr ....Respondent CORAM : RAJESH G. KETKAR, J DATE : 28th March, 2019 P.C. : Due to paucity of time the matter is adjourned for 18/04/2019 on supplementary board. In the meantime, Ad-interim relief if any, granted earlier to continue. ( FOR REGISTRAR JUDICIAL - I )

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 2: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.

Order - Status 3: Order Text Request Text Click the button above to request the full text of this order.