Bombay High Court
Ankush Rambhau Rokade vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 16 November, 2016
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
19wp-10116-15.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
19 WRIT PETITION NO. 10116 OF 2015
Ankush s/o Rambhau Rokade ... Petitioners
Age 27 years, Occu: Service,
R/o wadgaon Savta, Tq. Parner,
District Ahmednagar
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Secretary,
School Education & sports
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai 400 032
2. The Director,
Sports and Youth Services,
Maharashtra State, Pune-1
3. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar.
4. The Education Officer (Primary)
and the Member Secretary, District
Selection Committee,
Zilla Parishad, Ahmednagar
5. Maharashtra Tug-of-War Association, ... Respondents
Omsai, 220, Vatsalyanagar Housing
Society, CIDCO, Nanded 431 603,
Through its Secretary
Mr. Chandrakant K. Shinde, Advocate for the petitioner,
Mrs. S. S.Raut, AGP for the Respondent State.
Mr. S. T. Shelke, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4
Mr. Avinash S. Deshpande, Advocate for respondent No.5,
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
K. L. WADANE, JJ.
DATE : 16th November, 2016
JUDGMENT (Per S. V. Gangapurwala, J):
19wp-10116-15.odt
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With
consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final
disposal.
3. Mr. Shinde, the learned counsel for the
petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for
the benefit of reservation provided for Sportsman
category as per the Government Resolution dated 30th
April, 2005. According to the learned counsel, the
petitioner had appeared in the Tug-of-War Tournament
conducted by the Maharashtra Tug-of-War Association at
the State level and stood first position. The said
tournament was held on 14th and 15th January,2008.
Certificate to that effect is issued to the petitioner.
The petitioner was selected as Shikshan Sevak in the
Zilla Parshad School in the year 2010. Certificate of
the petitioner was referred to the Joint Director of
Sports who, in turn, referred it to the Respondent
No.5- Maharashtra Tug-of-War Association. Respondent
No.5 passed an order stating that the petitioner is
not a meritorious person. On the basis of that, show
cause notice is issued to the petitioner as to why
services of the petitioner should not be terminated.
19wp-10116-15.odt
On the basis of the order passed by respondent No.5,
the selection of the petitioner is cancelled. The same
is illegal. The petitioner, by amending the petition,
has challenged the said order also.
4. Mr.Deshpande, the learned counsel for respondent
No.5 submits that the respondent Association are
governed by the Indian Tug-of War Competition Code,
2013 and the candidate has to take part in at least
three tournaments, as per the said Code so as to
consider him as meritorious. The petitioner had
participated only in one tournament. As per the said
Code, the petitioner is not eligible to be considered
as meritorious candidate.
5. We have also heard learned AGP for respondent
No.2. The learned AGP submits that the respondent
No.2 referred the said certificate to Respondent No.5.
as it is under the aegis of respondent No.5, the
competition was held.
6. We had asked Mr. Deshpande, the learned counsel
for respondent no.5 regarding genuineness of the
certificate issued to the petitioner, which states that
the petitioner had secured first position in the Tug-of
War-Competition held by the Maharashtra Tug-of-War
19wp-10116-15.odt
Association at State level. Mr. Deshpande, the learned
counsel on instructions states that the said
certificate issued is a genuine certificate.
7. We have also heard Mr. Shelke, the learned
counsel for the respondent Nos. 3 and 4 who submits
that as respondent no.5 has held that petitioner is not
meritorious candidates, the order is rightly passed.
8. The Indian Tug-of War Competition Code, 2013 is
not applicable to the present case as the tournament
wherein the petitioner had participated and had secured
first position was held in the year 2008 and the
petitioner was appointed in the year 2010 as Shikshan
Sevak, whereas the said Code came into force in the
year 2013. The Government Resolution dated 30.04.2005
would squarely apply in the present case. The said
certificate of the petitioner certainly would be valid
as per Government Resolution dated 30th April, 2005 as
the post on which the petitioner is selected is a class
III post.
9. Considering the above, the order passed by
respondent No.5 is not in consonance with Government
Resolution dated 30th April, 2015 and the Code on which
respondent No.5 relies was not in force on the date
19wp-10116-15.odt
when the competition had taken place. The impugned
order terminating services of the petitioner is quashed
and set aside.
10. It is held that the certificate of the
petitioner of having participated in the Tug-of-War
Competition organized by the Maharashtra Tug-of-War
Association at State level is valid as per the
Government Resolution dated 30th April, 20105.
11.
In view of setting aside the order of the Zilla
Parishad, cancelling the selection of the petitioner,
consequences of the petitioner being reinstated shall
follow. The petitioner be given continuity, however,
shall not be entitled for the back wages from the date
of cancellation of his selection till the
reinstatement. Reinstatement shall be done within 15
days.
12. Rule is made absolute accordingly. No order as
to costs.
(K. L. WADANE, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )
JPC
