Bombay High Court
Rameshwar S/O Vishwanath Mankar vs Zp, Buldhana, Thr. Its C.E.O. ... on 26 February, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
wp2432.09.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.2432/2009
PETITIONER: Rameshwar s/o Vishwanath Mankar
aged about 46 years, r/o Village Sonala,
Tah. Sangrampur, District Buldhana.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS: 1. Zilla Parishad Buldhana,
ig through its Chief Executive Officer, Buldhana.
2. State of Maharashtra,
Department of Rural Development and
Water Conservation, through its
Principal Secretary, Mantralaya, Mumbai -32.
3. Shri Ramesh Anna Bunde,
Resident of At Post Sakhali (Buj),
Tah. & Distt. Buldhana.
4. Divisional Commissioner,
Amravati Division, Amravati.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri P.S. Patil, Advocate for petitioner
Mrs. M.P. Munshi, Advocate for respondent no.1
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, AND
A.S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
DATE : 26.02.2016
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
By this petition, the petitioner seeks a declaration that the
Zilla Parishad, Buldana had illegally denied the promotion to the
petitioner in 10% quota as a Zilla Parishad employee as per the guidelines
wp2432.09.odt
of the State of Maharashtra, dated 22.8.2005.
Admittedly, the petitioner was an employee of the Gram
Panchayat and his date of birth is 2.6.1961. It is relevant to refer to the
date of birth of the petitioner in this case as the issue involved in this case
is whether the petitioner was entitled to promotion - absorption in the
Zilla Parishad services from 10% quota as provided by the Maharashtra
Zilla Parishad Services (Employment) (Revised) Rules, 2005, specially
Rule 10 -A (3) thereof that provides for an upper age limit for absorption.
As per the policy of the State Government that was framed by the Rules of
the year 2005, 10% posts in the Zilla Parishad were liable to be filled by
the employees from the Gram Panchayat as per their seniority. A seniority
list of the employees working in the Gram Panchayat was prepared on
20.10.2006, reckoning the seniority of the employees w.e.f. 1.1.2006.
Since the petitioner had not completed the age of 45 years on 1.1.2006,
the name of the petitioner was included in the list of Gram Panchayat
employees that were liable to be absorbed in the Zilla Parishad
establishment. In the year 2007, the Gram Panchayat employees were
absorbed in the Zilla Parishad and since the petitioner was not absorbed
in the Zilla Parishad, the petitioner has filed the instant petition, seeking a
declaration that the denial on the part of the Zilla Parishad to absorb the
petitioner in their services, though he was senior to several other
wp2432.09.odt
employees, is bad in law.
Shri Patil, the learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted
that the petitioner was not 45 years of age as on 1.1.2006, the date from
which the seniority of the employees in the Gram Panchayat was
reckoned. It is submitted that the date of birth of the petitioner is
2.6.1961 and the petitioner had not completed 45 years of service on
1.1.2006. It is submitted that since the petitioner was the senior most
employee of the Gram Panchayat who could have been absorbed in the
services of the Zilla Parishad, the Zilla Parishad ought to have absorbed
the petitioner in their services in view of the Rules of 2005.
Mrs. Munshi, the learned Counsel for the Zilla Parishad
supported the action of the Zilla Parishad and submitted by referring to
the revised Rules of 2005 that only those employees of the Gram
Panchayat that were not above the age of 45 years were to be considered
for absorption - promotion in the Zilla Parishad services. It is submitted
that by the revised Rules of 2005 the upper age limit for absorption in the
Zilla Parishad services was relaxed to 45 years in respect of Gram
Panchayat employees. It is submitted that the petitioner was more than
45 years of age when the seniority list was published on 20.10.2006 and
he was more than 46 years of age when the actual orders of absorption
were passed by the Zilla Parishad in the year 2007 for filling the
wp2432.09.odt
vacancies. It is submitted that in view of the revised Rules of 2005, the
upper age limit being 45 years in respect of the Gram Panchayat
employees, the Zilla Parishad was justified in denying the promotion -
absorption of the petitioner in the services of the Zilla Parishad.
On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties and on a
perusal of the Rules of 2005, it appears that the Zilla Parishad did not
commit any mistake in refusing to absorb the petitioner in their services.
The petitioner was admittedly born on 2.6.1961 and was of more than
45 years of age on 20.10.2006 when the seniority list of the employees of
the Gram Panchayat was published. Though the seniority list published on
20.10.2006 reckoned the date for consideration of the seniority w.e.f.
1.1.2006, the petitioner could not have claimed his absorption in view of
the said seniority list, when he was more than 45 years of age on the date
of publication of the seniority list and on the date when the Zilla Parishad
considered the Gram Panchayat employees for absorption in their services
in the year 2007. In view of the revised Rules of 2005, the upper age limit
for absorption of the Gram Panchayat employees in the Zilla Parishad
services was 45 and the petitioner could not have sought his absorption in
the Zilla Parishad in the year 2007, when the Gram Panchayat employees
were absorbed in their services as per the revised Rules.
wp2432.09.odt
For the reasons aforesaid, we dismiss the writ petition with
no order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
