Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Esther Rani Rajan Pawar vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 21 June, 2024

Author: Mangesh S. Patil

Bench: Mangesh S. Patil

2024:BHC-AUG:11517-DB




                                              1                            wp 5931.24

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 5931 OF 2024

                        Esther Rani Rajan Pawar                 ..     Petitioner

                             Versus

                        The State of Maharashtra and others     ..     Respondents

                 Shri A. P. Gunge, Advocate for the Petitioner.
                 Shri D. R. Korde, A.G.P. for the Respondent Nos. 1 and 5.

                                    CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL AND
                                            SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 21 JUNE 2024.

FINAL ORDER :

. Heard.

2. The petitioner is seeking correction in the school record and even the record of the respondent/Higher Secondary Board, wherein there is incorrect spelling of her surname.

3. Learned advocate for the petitioner submits that for the time being she is only soliciting directions to the Education Officer for deciding the proposal forwarded to him by the School in the light of Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code.

4. Having heard both the sides, it appears that the Education Officer has refused to consider the request of the petitioner only on the ground that petitioner having left the school and that 2 wp 5931.24 Clause 26.4 of the Secondary School Code does not permit any correction thereafter.

5. Suffice for the purpose to make a reference to the decision of the Full Bench of this Court in the matter of Janabai D/o Himmatrao Thakur Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another reported in 2019(6) Mh.L.J. 769, which comprehends the situation wherein such a proposal cannot be refused on the ground of pupil having left the school. Education Officer does not seem to be aware of the decision and apparently has not undertaken any scrutiny in the light of the decision in the matter of Janabai D/o Himmatrao Thakur Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another (supra).

6. Writ petition is allowed. Impugned order/communication of the respondent/Education Officer dated 01.02.2024 (Exhibit - B) is quashed and set aside. He shall now consider petitioner's proposal afresh, on its own merits and in the light of the decision in the matter of Janabai D/o Himmatrao Thakur Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another (supra). However, he shall not reject it for the reasons mentioned in the impugned communication. The decision shall be taken as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of six (06) weeks from today.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J. ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J. ] bsb/June 24