DEEPAK SUBHASHLAL GUGALE vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — WP/4961/2026

Case under Constitution of India Section 14 AND 226. Disposed: Contested--DISPOSED OFF on 05th May 2026.

Case disposed

CNR: HCBM030026222026

Filing Number

WP/1986/2026

Filing Date

17-Jan-2026

Registration No

WP/4961/2026

Registration Date

04-May-2026

Judge

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

Coram

Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

Bench Type

Division

Judicial Branch

Civil

Decision Date

05-May-2026

Nature of Disposal

Contested--DISPOSED OFF

Last updated 14-Jun-2026

Acts & Sections

Constitution of India Section 14 AND 226
M.e.p.s.act 1977 and Rules 1981

Petitioner(s)

  1. 1.DEEPAK SUBHASHLAL GUGALE

    Adv. THOMBRE CHANDRAKANT V.

Respondent(s)

  1. 1.THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

  2. 2.EDUCATION OF SECONDARY

  3. 3.SHRI AMOLAK JAIN VIDYA PRASARAK MANDAL THROUGH ITS SECRETARY

  4. 4.THE HEAD MASTER MOTILAL KOTHARI VIDYALAYA

Case History

  1. Case disposedDisposed

  2. 05-May-2026

    Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi,hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. KadethankarView PDF

    The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court partly allowed the writ petition, finding that the Education Officer (Respondent No. 2) lacked authority to reject the petitioner's transfer proposal from an unaided to an aided Assistant Teacher position on 24.11.2025. The court remitted the matter to the Commissioner (Education), Maharashtra, Pune—the competent authority—to decide the proposal on merit within twelve weeks, with an opportunity for the school management to cure any deficiencies within two weeks if identified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

  3. 05-May-2026

    Petitions For Admission - Fresh CIVIL Side Matters

    Hon'ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'ble Shri Justice Ajit B. Kadethankar

  4. 17-Jan-2026

    Case filed

    Registration No. WP/4961/2026

casestatus.in Summary

The Aurangabad Bench of Bombay High Court partly allowed the writ petition, finding that the Education Officer (Respondent No. 2) lacked authority to reject the petitioner's transfer proposal from an unaided to an aided Assistant Teacher position on 24.11.2025. The court remitted the matter to the Commissioner (Education), Maharashtra, Pune—the competent authority—to decide the proposal on merit within twelve weeks, with an opportunity for the school management to cure any deficiencies within two weeks if identified. This case analysis is maintained by casestatus.in based on publicly available court records.

Explore other courts

District Courts Supreme Court
Search Another Case