Sham Jayram Matole vs Head Master Zillha Parishad Primary ... on 6 December, 2023

[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Sham Jayram Matole vs Head Master Zillha Parishad Primary ... on 6 December, 2023

Bench: Mangesh S. Patil

1 wp.3218.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

928 WRIT PETITION NO.3218 OF 2018

Sham Jayram Matole
Age : 21 years, Occu : Nil,
R/o. Khalapuri, Post - Bodkha (Bk)
Tq. Ghansawangi, Dist. Jalna .. Petitioner

Versus

1. Head Master
Zillha Parishad Primary School
Khalapur, Tq. Ghansawangi,
Dist. Jalna

2. Education Officer,
Zilla Parishad Jalna
Tq. & Dist. Jalna .. Respondents
....
Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Mahesh K. Bhosle and
Mr. Mahesh L. Muthal
Advocate for Respondents No.1 & 2 : Mr. P. D. Suryawanshi
....

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL
AND
NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

DATED : DECEMBER 06, 2023

PER COURT :

. Heard both the sides.

2. The petitioner is seeking correction of the school record.

3. The respondent no.1, who is the Head Master of the Zilla

Parishad Primary School, has refuted to process the petitioner's request

::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 17:45:42 :::
2 wp.3218.18

only on the ground that he had already left the school and request could

not have been considered under the Secondary School Code (for short,

'S.S. Code').

4. Considering the fact that decision under Clause 26.4 of the

S.S. Code is supposed to be taken by the Education Officer and not by

the Head Master, irrespective of the reason being quoted in the

impugned communication, it was not appropriate for the Head Master to

process the petitioner's application.

5. Needless to state that the respondent no.2 - Education

Officer will have to take decision in accordance with the decision in the

matter of Janabai d/o. Himmatrao Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra and

Ors.; 2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 and the issue about the student leaving the

school would not be germane, if petitioner is able to satisfy the

Education Officer that it was an obvious mistake.

6. In light of the above, we proceed to pass the following

order:

ORDER

(i)      The writ petition is allowed.


(ii)     The respondent no.1 shall immediately forward the proposal to

the respondent no.2 within two weeks and the latter shall decide it on its own merits and in the light of the observations in the matter of ::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 17:45:42 ::: 3 wp.3218.18 Janabai d/o. Himmatrao Thakur Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors.; 2019 (6) Mh.L.J. 769 within four weeks thereafter.





       [NEERAJ P. DHOTE]                          [MANGESH S. PATIL]
            JUDGE                                      JUDGE




GGP




::: Uploaded on - 07/12/2023                ::: Downloaded on - 07/12/2023 17:45:42 :::

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Bombay High Court