WP 3455/15 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 3455/2015
Mukesh s/o. Balwantrao Vaidya,
Aged About 50 yrs, Occupation-Service,
R/o Lakhpati Gali, Shegaon, District Buldhana. PETITIONER
VERSUS
1. Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran,
4th floor, Express Towers, Nariman Point,
Mumbai 400 021
through its Members Secretary.
2. Superintending Engineer,
Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran
(Urban and Rural), Nehru Chowk,
Akola.
3. The Executive Engineer,
Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran
(Urban and Rural Division Scheme),
Buldana.
4. The State of Maharashtra,
through Secretary,
Department of Water Supply and Sanitation,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032. RESPONDENTS
Shri P.D. Meghe, counsel for the petitioner.
Shri D.M. Kakani, counsel for respondent nos.1 to 3.
Shri N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent no.4.
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND
A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATE : FEBRUARY 25 , 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
RULE. Rule is made returnable forthwith. The petition is
heard finally at the stage of admission with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties.
::: Uploaded on - 29/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 06:37:22 :::WP 3455/15 2 Judgment
2. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition seeking the relief of grant of time bound promotion in the pay-scale of Junior Engineer on the ground that the petitioner has completed twelve years of service on 10.11.2000.
3. It is the case of the petitioner that though all necessary requirements for being entitled for grant of time bound promotion have been fulfilled by the petitioner, said benefit has been denied to him. On the contrary, other junior colleagues of the petitioner have also been granted the said benefit. It is, therefore, prayed that the relief of time bound promotion be made available to the petitioner.
4. Reply has been filed on behalf of the respondent nos.1 to 3 in which it has been stated that before granting the benefit of time bound promotion, the respondent nos.1 to 3 have to first verify as to whether the petitioner has passed the qualifying examination for being entitled to the said benefit. It has been stated that though the petitioner has been called upon to furnish the relevant documents in that regard, the same are still awaited and, therefore, necessary decision could not be taken.
5. In the aforesaid set of facts, we dispose of the writ petition by passing the following order:-
::: Uploaded on - 29/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 06:37:22 ::: WP 3455/15 3 Judgment
I) The petitioner shall submit all the relevant documents as
demanded by the respondents to the respondent no.2, within a period of fifteen days from today. Thereafter, the respondent no.2 shall forward said documents to the concerned authority for taking necessary decision.
The decision on the representation that has been moved by the petitioner shall be taken within a period of three months after the same is forwarded by the respondent no.2 to the concerned authority.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
APTE
::: Uploaded on - 29/02/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 31/07/2016 06:37:22 :::