1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.6032 OF 2009 Bazme Adab Society School, Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, High School and Jr. College, Faizpur Through : Its Chairman School Committee, Dr. Shaikh Abdul Jaleel Abdul Vahed, Age 50 yrs, Occ. Medical Practitioner, R/o Ghee Bazar, Faizpur, Dist. Jalgaon PETITIONER. V E R S U S 1) The State of Maharashtra Through it’s Secretary School Education, Education Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. (Copy to be served on G.P. High Court of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad. ) 2) The Education Officer (Sec.) Z.P., Jalgaon. RESPONDENTS. Ms. Surekha Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. R.K. Ladda, AGP for State R-1 and 2. ..... CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND K. U. CHANDIWAL, JJ. DATE : 8TH DECEMBER, 2009. 2 PER COURT :- 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. 2. Petitioner submits that their proposal of three teachers namely Shaeb Mohammed Fayaz Mohammed, Shaikh Vasif Ahmed Rafiq Ahmed and Mohammed Shakil Nasiruddin were forwarded for approval as teachers. According to the counsel appearing for the petitioner their proposals are still pending. This petition raises objection to the communication made by the Education Officer, Secondary dated 24.07.2009. In the said communication Education Officer has referred to certain complaints against the said teachers whose proposals were forwarded for approval. In the foot note of the said communication, Education Officer has mentioned that approval of those 2-3 teachers need not be granted. 2. In law Education Officer, Secondary is an authority to grant or refuse proposal to the teachers. The decision has to be taken by the Education Officer. It is mis-conception on the part of the Education Officer to put a foot note in the impugned communication in respect of the issue of approval of those teachers. 3. Without entering into the merits of the proposal for approval of services, we find it appropriate to direct the Education Officer, Zilla Parishad, 3 Jalgaon to pass appropriate orders in accordance with the record maintained by the School and strictly in accordance with law, within Four Weeks from today. Education Officer Secondary is present in Court. It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion regarding the merits of the proposal. The Education Officer shall deal with the issue strictly in accordance with law. If, found necessary, the Education Officer is entitled to hear the above mentioned three teachers and the representatives of the Management. In the light of the order, impugned communication dated 24.07.2009 stands set aside. Rule is made accordingly absolute. 4. Authenticated copy be given. ( K. U. CHANDIWAL, J. ) ( NARESH H. PATIL, J. ) ***** aaa/6032.09