1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.9882 OF 2009 Shri Manikrao Gulabrao Taware & Anr. ...Petitioners Versus The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents ...... Mr.N.V.Bandiwadekar for Petitioners. Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for Respondents 1 & 2. None for Respondent No.3. ...... CORAM:- A.M.KHANWILKAR AND R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATED:- MARCH 15, 2010. P.C. 1. Heard Counsel for the parties. 2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, by consent. Mr.Sonawane, A.G.P. waives notice for Respondents 1 and 2. 3. As short question is involved, Petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith, by consent. 4. By this Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, essentially the order passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Raigad Zilla Parishad, Alibag dated 31st August 2009 is under challenge. By the 2 said order, the Education Officer rejected the proposal for approval to the promotion of Petitioner No.1 on the post of Head Master. It is noticed that two reasons have been recorded to justify the said decision. Firstly, there are complaints and secondly the appointment is in breach of the reservation quota and the backlog in that behalf. The grievance of the Petitioners is that insofar as the first ground is concerned, no material has been furnished to the Petitioners as to what complaint has been received, thereby denying opportunity to the Petitioners to effectively defend themselves. Insofar as the second ground is concerned, it is contended on behalf of the Petitioners that there are only two posts of Head Master in the Petitioner No.2 educational institution, for which reason, there can be no reservation. Besides, it is contended that the order in question has been passed by the Education Officer without giving any opportunity to the Petitioners. 5. For the nature of grievance brought before us, we think it appropriate that the Education Officer ought to give proper opportunity to the Petitioners and only after considering all the objections taken by the Petitioners proceed to decide the points in issue. Accordingly, we set-aside the impugned decision dated 31st August 2009 and direct the Education 3 Officer (Secondary) to reconsider the proposal of the Petitioners and to give fair opportunity to the Petitioners including furnishing the relevant documents on the basis of which he had proceeded to decide the proposal by way of impugned decision. 6. All questions raised before us as well as questions which may arise for consideration before the Education Officer are left open to be decided on its own merits. 7. Petitioners to appear before the Education Officer on 29th March 2010 in the office of the Education Officer at 11.00 a.m., on which date, the Education Officer may proceed with the hearing or fix some suitable date for hearing while ensuring that final decision on the proposal will be taken not later than 26th April 2010 and the same should also be communicated to the Petitioners within such time. 8. Petition disposed of on the above terms. (R.M.SAVANT, J.) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.)