1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4542 OF 2009 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 1359 OF 2009 Shaikh Usman Education Society, through its Chairman Mohammed Ayyub Mohammed Ishaq Naga, Dist: Nasik ..Petitioner versus The Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parshad Nashik, District Nasik & Ors. ..Respondents Mr. Afroz Siddiqui with Mr. Mateen Shaikh for Petitioner. Mrs. S. S. Bhende – AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 – State. Mr. Akhlaque Solkar for Respondent Nos. 4 to 13. CORAM : D. D. SINHA & A. A. SAYED , JJ. DATED : JANUARY 14, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned AGP for the State and the learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 4 to 13. 2. Counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of this court that 3 Shikshan Sevaks, viz. (i) Sheikh Nayyar Tanvir Ahmed, (ii) Mohd. Afzal 2 Mohd. Yusuf and (iii) Ansari Siraj Ahmed Mohd. Mustafa and 5 Assistant Teachers viz. (i) Ansari Abdul Rajjak Mohd. Hussein, (ii) Moiddin Shafiuddin, (iii) Smt. Khan Nazma Ebrahim, (iv) Smt. Javeria Ansari Nihal Ahmed and (v) Shaikh Asif Mehmood, were appointed in the year 2005, 2006 on different dates by the petitioner society. Their proposals for grant of approval were forwarded to the respondent No.1 – Education Officer. However, for one reason or the other the decision on the said proposal was not taken by the Education Officer and the matter was referred to the Deputy Director of Education and the Deputy Director of Education referred back the matter to the Education Officer. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that appropriate direction in this regard be given to the Education Officer to decide the proposal submitted by the petitioner management in respect of these teachers within a stipulated period in accordance with law. 3. The learned AGP has submitted that the Education Officer shall take a decision on the said proposal in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this Order. 4. It is really unfortunate that the matters regarding grant of approval are kept pending by the Education Department for such a long time. We expect 3 the Education Department to decide the matters pertaining to grant of approval one way or the other in accordance with law at the earliest so that the management, the teachers, are aware whether proposal about the approval are accepted by the Education Department or rejected. In the present case the Education Officer is directed is take a decision on the proposal submitted by the petitioner management in respect of the teachers one way or the other in accordance with law and procedure applicable in this regard within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of this Order. 5. With these observations and directions, writ petition is disposed of accordingly. In view of the disposal of the writ petition, civil application No. 1359 of 2009 does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly. (D. D. SINHA, J.) ( A. A. SAYED, J.)