NITIN RAMESH KHEDEKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. N.V. Bandiwadekar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Mr. Y.D. Patil, A.G.P. appearing on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 3. None appears for respondent Nos.4 and 5 though served.

(2.) Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of parties rule is made returnable forthwith.

(3.) By the present petition fled under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the legality and propriety of the orders dated 31.12.2018 and 22.05.2019 passed by the Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Ratnagiri i.e. respondent No.3, inter alia, refusing approval to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate grounds in the respondent No.5 School. One of the reasons given by the respondent No.3 / Education Officer for refusing the approval for appointment is that unless and until the stafng pattern in respect of privately aided, partly aided, secondary and higher secondary schools is fnalised by the Government, appointments / approval of appointments on compassionate grounds should not be fnalised. Being aggrieved, the petitioner has fled the present petition.