Nabiji Shamimbegum Quamaroodin vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 3442 Bom

                                     1             25-5668.odt


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                     
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD




                                            
                      WRIT PETITION NO.5668 OF 2014

    Nabiji Shamimbegum Quamoroodin,
    Age 26 years, Occ. Education,
    r/o. Paigambarpura, 




                                           
    Khadkali Galli, Udgir,
    Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur                       ..Petitioner

                  Vs




                                    
    1. The State of Maharashtra,
       Through Secretary,
                              
       School Education and Sports
       Division, Mantralaya,
       Mumbai
                             
    2. The Commissioner,
       Maharashtra State Council of
       Examinations, Pune
      


    3. The Director of Education 
   



       (Primary), Maharashtra State,
        Pune

    4. Bhivandi Nijampur City Municipal





       Corporation Shikshan Mandal,
       Bhivandi, through its
       Administrative Officer           ..Respondents 

                             --





    Mr.S.S.Thombre, Advocate for petitioner

    Mrs.M.A.Deshpande, AGP for respondent no.1

    Mr.A.R.Nikam, Advocat for respondent no.2
                             --




     ::: Uploaded on - 05/07/2016            ::: Downloaded on - 30/07/2016 07:27:01 :::
                                              2            25-5668.odt


                                     CORAM :  S.S. SHINDE AND




                                                                            
                                              SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. 
                                     DATE  :  JUNE 28, 2016        




                                                    
    ORDER :

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner, the learned AGP appearing for

respondent no.1 and the learned Counsel appearing

for respondent no.2. None present for respondent

no.4, though served.

2. The learned Counsel appearing for the

petitioner submits that though, it is the

contention of the respondents that a Call Letter

was sent to the petitioner asking him to appear

for the Interview, no such letter was received by

the petitioner. The learned Counsel submits that

it is highly improbable that the petitioner, who

is in desperate need of an employment, will not

attend the interview inspite of receiving the

letter calling him for interview. He, therefore,

submits that the petitioner may be issued an

appointment order.

3 25-5668.odt

3. On the other hand, the learned AGP for the

State vehemently opposes the prayer of the

petitioner. She submits that since the petitioner

did not attend the Interview, he cannot be given

appointment order. She, therefore, prays that the

petition may be rejected.

4. We have given careful consideration to the

submissions advanced by the learned Counsel

appearing for the parties. With their able

assistance, perused the pleading in the petition

and annexures thereto.

5. As regards the contention of the petitioner

that he did not receive the call letter for oral

interview, it is not possible for this Court to

enter into such disputed question of fact.

Therefore, we cannot consider the said contention

of the petitioner.

4 25-5668.odt

6. Since the petitioner's case was recommended

for Bhivandi Nijampur City Municipal Corporation

Shikshan Mandal, through selection process, which

was conducted in the year 2010, in case, still

there is a vacant post of 'Shikshan Sevak' for

Urdu medium, we direct respondent no.4 to consider

the case of the petitioner, keeping in view the

relevant Rules and take a decision as

expeditiously as possible, however, within a

period of eight weeks from today and communicate

the decision to the petitioner.

7. This Writ Petition stands disposed of

accordingly.

8. The parties to act on authenticated copies of

this order.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.] kbp