RAJAN SAHADEO RATUL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The respondent has filed its Affidavit in Reply. Heard. By consent of parties, rule made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The present matter is covered by a recent decision of this Court in the matter of Gramvikas Shikshan Mandal and Ors v. State of Maharashtra and Ors. (Writ Petition (St) No.4493 of 2022, decided on 26/4/2023) What is most surprising is that the Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur region, Respondent in the earlier matter is the very Respondent in the present matter. Our finding was that if the Government has failed to nominate any candidate out of the surplus candidates for filling up a vacancy and has also failed to communicate with the Management, the post cannot be allowed to remain vacant for an undetermined period. In terms of the said finding, the Education Officer was directed to grant the requisite approval to the employee in the earlier matter.

(3.) Despite the previous decision, the Education Department of the same region has persisted in continuing its inflexible approach and has repeated itself over again. This is unacceptable and we deprecate the lackadaisical attitude adopted by the Education Department of the Kolhapur region. We will deal with this later in the present judgment.