wp3745.05.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.3745/2005
PETITIONER: Subhash Govardhan Rathod,
Aged Major, working as Teacher in
Municipal Council School, Karanja, District
Washim.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS : 1. Urban Development Department
through its Secretary, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 32.
2. Commissioner, Amravati Division
Amravati (Regional Director of Municipal
Administration).
3. Collector, Washim (Chairman, District Selection
Committee), District Washim.
4. Municipal Council, Karanja, through
its Chief Officer.
5. Employment Exchange Officer,
Employment Exchange Office, Akola.
6. Regional Director of Municipal Administration,
Amravati.
(Amended as per Court's order dt. 27.2.17)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri R.D. Karode, Advocate for petitioner
Shri K.L. Dharmadhikari, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3 & 5
Shri D.M. Surjuse with Shri G.G. Mishra, Advocates for respondent no.4
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, AND
V.M. DESHPANDE, JJ.
DATE : 27.02.2017 ::: Uploaded on - 02/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2017 00:47:06 ::: wp3745.05.odt 2 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
By this petition, the petitioner has sought a direction against the respondent to grant approval to the appointment of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher in the respondent - Municipal Council.
It is stated that though the petitioner's name was not recommended by the District Selection Committee due to the backlog of appointees in the reserved category, it appears that the cases of three others were considered favourably by the Regional Director of Municipal Administration (R.D.M.A.) and their services were approved. The petition was filed in the year 2005 and we had granted status quo in the matter. In view of the order of status quo, the petitioner continued to work on the post of Assistant Teacher in the respondent - Municipal Council. There is nothing on record to show that the name of the petitioner was not recommended as the petitioner did not possess the requisite qualifications. It appears from the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of the respondent that there was a backlog in some reserved category and therefore, the petitioner's name was not recommended by the Selection Committee. The petitioner is working with the respondent - Municipal Council as an Assistant Teacher during the pendency of the writ petition for 12 years. The petitioner was appointed as early as in the year 1998. In ::: Uploaded on - 02/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2017 00:47:06 ::: wp3745.05.odt 3 this background, without considering the other aspects of the matter, specially in the absence of any reply pointing out as to why the petitioner's name was not recommended by the Selection Committee to the R.D.M.A., it would be necessary to dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the R.D.M.A. to consider the claim of the petitioner for regularization of his services as the petitioner is working for almost 20 years with the respondent - Municipal Council and the name of the petitioner was recommended by the Municipal Council to the Selection Committee. Since there is nothing on record to show that the petitioner was not qualified to hold the post, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, it would be necessary to dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the Regional Director of Municipal Administration to consider granting approval to the services of the petitioner on the post of Assistant Teacher, if the petitioner is otherwise qualified to hold the post. The Regional Director of Municipal Administration should take a decision in the matter at the earliest and in any case within four months.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
::: Uploaded on - 02/03/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 03/03/2017 00:47:06 :::