1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1529 OF 2009 Ashok S/o. Vasantrao Bochare, Age-43 years, Occu-Service, R/o.Bhavani Chowk, S.T.Colony, Osmanabad, District Osmanabad PETITIONER VERSUS 1. The State of Maharashtra, Through it’s Secretary, Department of Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32. 2. The Director, Maharashtra State Educational Research and Training Council, Pune-30 3. The Deputy Director of Education, Latur Division, Latur, 4. The Education Officer, (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Osmanabad. 5. Dharashiv Prashala, Osmanabad, Malkhare Building, Sanja Ves, Osmanabad, Dist : Osmanabad, Through its Head Master. RESPONDENTS Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, learned counsel for petitioner. Mr.V.B.Ghadge, learned AGP for respondent no.1 to 4. Mr.P.S.Chavan, learned counsel for respondent no.5. 2 (CORAM : P.V.HARDAS AND A.V.POTDAR, J.J.) DATE : 21/07/2009 PER COURT : (Per P.V.Hardas, J.) 1. Rule. Rule returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, this petition is heard finally at the stage of admission. 2. This petition impugns the communication dated 30/05/2008 by the Deputy Director of Education, Latur, Division Latur rejecting the application of the petitioner for admission to Postal D.Ed. Course or on the ground that the appointment of the petitioner was not according to the roaster point and the petitioner is an untrained secondary teacher. The second ground which is attributed by the Deputy Director of Education in the said order is that the petitioner is not eligible in the light of the Government Resolution dated 10/01/2005. The petitioner being aggrieved by the aforesaid order of the Deputy Director, filed appeal before the Director of Education, Pune. The appeal of the petitioner came to be dismissed by the impugned communication dated 06/02/2009. The Appellate authority departed from the reasons stated by the Deputy Director and gave 3 altogether different reasons. 3. It appears that the petitioner came to be appointed finally as an Assistant Teacher in the year 1988-89. The approval came to be 3 granted to the appointment of the petitioner as an untrained teacher from 1993 onwards and the said approval is continuing even till this date. The petitioner has been paid the salary from the salary grants. Shri.Jadhavar, learned counsel for the petitioner has pointed out to us as to how the reasons given by the two authorities below are erroneous. Upon perusal of the aforesaid reasons for holding the petitioner as ineligible to be admitted to the Postal D.Ed.Course, according to us the said reasons display a total non application of mind of the authorities. The Deputy director has not stated as to how the petitioner is ineligible as per the Government Resolution dated 10/01/2005. The reasons given by the Appellate Authority are altogether different. The affidavit in reply filed on behalf of the respondents is extremely vague and no reasons are given which would justify the rejection of the application. In the light of that, therefore according to us the impugned orders are unsustainable in Law and deserve to be quashed and set aside. 4. In the light of that, therefore this petition succeeds and the impugned orders are hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remitted back to the Deputy Director of Education, Latur Division, Latur to decide the application of the petitioner seeking admission to Postal D.Ed. Course afresh and in accordance with Law. This exercise to be carried out by the Deputy Director of Education within 4 weeks from today and to communicate the decision thereon to the petitioner. 4 5. Rule is thus made absolute on the terms indicated above with no order as to costs. Copy of this order duly authenticated by Shirastedar of this Court be provided to either counsel on request. (A.V.POTDAR, J.) (P.V.HARDAS, J.) khs/JULY 2009/wp1529-09