Bombay High Court
Rameshwar Jagoji Pawar vs State Of Maharashtra & 2 Ors on 7 April, 2016
Bench: B.P. Dharmadhikari
1 wp83-03
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
Writ Petition No.83 of 2003
Rameshwar Jagoji Pawar,
aged 30 years, Occ. Teacher,
R/o At Post Malegaon,
P.S. Karanja, Dist. Washim. ... Petitioners.
-Versus.-
1. State of Maharashtra through
its Secretary, Department of Rural
Development, Mantralaya, Mumbai -32.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Akola.
3. Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Washim. ... ... Respondents.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Karode h/d Mr. P.C. Madkholkar, counsel for petitioner.
Mr. N.M. Ekre, AGP for respondent no.1.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI &
P.N. DESHMUKH, JJ.
DATE : 7th April, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT ( Per B. P. Dharmadhikari, J.)
Heard advocate Karode, holding for advocate P.C. Madkholkar
and learned AGP for respondent no. 1. Nobody appears for respondent nos.
2 & 3. It appears that respondent nos. 2 & 3 have not filed any reply.
2 wp83-03
2. Petitioner's case is that he is employee of respondent no. 2, Zilla
Parishad Akola and at the stage of bifurcation of that Zilla Parishad into Zilla
Parishad, Akola and Zilla Parishad, Washim, he gave option and opted for
Zilla Parishad, Akola.
3. Prayer in writ petition is to direct respondents to consider his
permanent absorption in Zilla Parishad, Akola in terms of that option.
Petition has been filed before this court on 18.11.2002 and an interim prayer
was made to restrain that Zilla Parishad from filling in any vacancy in the
cadre of primary teacher unless petitioner is absorbed.
4. This court has issued a rule in the matter on 10.2.2003 and also
granted that interim prayer as ad-interim relief. This ad-interim relief
continues to operate even today.
5. Advocate Karode, in this situation, submitted that there were
several such matters and this court has made rule absolute in terms of
interim order. He has invited our attention to orders dated 29.11.2011 in
W.P. No. 2154/2011. Learned AGP submits that dispute is between
petitioner on one hand and his employer i.e. respondent nos. 2 & 3 on the
other hand. He also submits that order of this court dated 29.11.2011 is
about Gondia and Bhandara Zilla Parishads.
6. The claim made by petitioner is not disputed either by Zilla
3 wp83-03
Parishad, Akola or by Zilla Paishad, Washim. By ad-interim order, this court
has restrained Zilla Parishad, Akola from filling in any vacancy in the cadre
of primary teacher unless and until petitioner is absorbed as per option
exercised by him. No efforts have been made by respondent no. 2 Zilla
Parishad Akola to get this order vacated.
7. This interim order is operating for last more than 13 years.
8. In this situation, we find that interest of justice can be met with by
directing the respondent no. 2 to absorb petitioner in its employment by
considering option exercised by him, if he is not so absorbed already till this
date. Decision on his request for absorption and option to be taken within a
period of four months from today. If necessary, opportunity shall be
extended to petitioner. If respondent no. 2, for any reason, rejects the
request of petitioner for absorption, that order shall not be given effect to for
period of four weeks after it is taken.
9. Interim orders granted by this court on 10.2.2003 shall continue
to operate for period of three months from today and shall cease to operate
automatically thereafter.
10. Rule is made absolute. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Hirekhan
