: 1 : wp.4555.2011+ vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.4555 OF 2011 Suresh K. Thorat .. Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents a/w WRIT PETITION NO.4556 OF 2011 Bhagwan R. Bilare .. Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. .. Respondents Mr.Shrishail Sakhare for the Petitioner Mr.A.B. Vagyani, AGP, for the Respondent Nos.1, 2 & 3 CORAM: B.H. MARLAPALLE & SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DATED: NOVEMBER 14, 2011 P.C.: 1. Heard. Rule. 2. Respondent No.4 is a formal party and the main challenge in the petitions is against the order passed by Respondent No.2. Respondent No.2 has filed affidavit in reply. Hence, the petitions have : 2 : wp.4555.2011+ been heard finally and are being disposed of by this common judgment. 3. Both the petitioners came to be appointed as assistant teachers and their appointment was approved as such. However, by the impugned order dated 6.6.2011, Respondent No.2 reviewed his order passed earlier i.e. 3.10.2008 and stayed without assigning any reasons. Hence, by our order dated 5.9.2011, we called upon the Education Officer to explain his source of power to review the order passed by him granting the approval. Respondent No.2 in his affidavit in reply has conceded that nowhere in the scheme of MEPS Act 1977 or the Rules framed thereunder, there is any such power vested in him. No government resolution has also been placed before us empowering the Education Officer to review the order of approval granted earlier. 4. Admittedly, Shri Sukhdeo Soma Kale, who was the Headmaster, died while in service and therefore the second petitioner Shri Bhagwan Bilare came to be appointed as the Headmaster and his appointment was approved as per the order dated 15.5.2008. The first petitioner Shri Thorat was appointed as the assistant teacher and his appointment was approved on 3.10.2008. By the impugned order dated 6.6.2011, the approval granted to the appointment of the Headmaster on 15.5.2008 has been stayed without assigning any : 3 : wp.4555.2011+ reasons. It is not the case of the Education Officer that Shri Bhagwan Bilare is not the seniormost teacher or he does not possess the requisite qualifications and experience for such appointment. This innocuous order passed on 6.6.2011 is therefore unsustainable and there is no such power vested with the Education Officer to review or recall the approval order passed by him earlier. In case the Education Officer subsequently had realised that the approval order was obtained by fraud or by misleading or by furnishing fabricated documents about the qualifications and experience, it would be necessary for him to issue a show-cause notice and place the papers before the Deputy Director of Education for appropriate order after hearing the parties concerned. 5. Hence, the petitions succeed and are hereby allowed accordingly. The impugned order dated 6.6.2011 is hereby quashed and set aside. 6. Rule is made absolute accordingly with no order as to costs. (SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J.) (B.H. MARLAPALLE, J.)