Thursday, 23, Apr, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ku Chanda Namdeo Doke And Another vs Zilla Parishad Yavatmal And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 6155 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 6155 Bom
Judgement Date : 18 October, 2016

Bombay High Court
Ku Chanda Namdeo Doke And Another vs Zilla Parishad Yavatmal And ... on 18 October, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
                                                           1                        wp5056.05

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                                         
                                       NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR




                                                                 
                              WRIT PETITION NO.5056  OF  2005


    1)      Ku. Chanda d/o Namdeo Doke,




                                                                
            aged about 36 years, 
            occupation : housewife, 
            r/o c/o A.S. Pangse, D.B. Pusadkar's
            House, Mahadeo Nagar, Yavatmal,
            Taluq and District Yavatmal.




                                                          
    2)      Ku. Archana d/o Krishnarao Kadam,
                                   
            aged about 30 years, occupation :
            housewife, r/o c/o Namdeorao Doke,
            At Post : Nandgaon Khandeshwar,
                                  
            Taluq and District Amravati.                       ...                Petitioners

                      - Versus -

    1)      Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal,
      


            Taluq and District Yavatmal, 
            through its Chief Executive Officer. 
   



    2)      The State of Maharashtra, through
            its Secretary, Department of 
            Employment and Self Employment, 





            Mantralaya, Fort, Mumbai - 400 032.                ...            Respondents



                                       -----------------
    Shri     A.V.   Palshikar,   Assistant   Government   Pleader   for   the   respondent





    no.2. 
                                       ----------------


                                              CORAM :   SMT. VASANTI A  NAIK AND 
                                                        KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : OCTOBER 18, 2016

2 wp5056.05

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SMT. VASANTI A NAIK , J.) :

By this writ petition, the petitioners seek a direction against

the respondent no.1 Zilla Parishad to apply proper caste based reservation

while making appointments on the posts of Gram Sevaks in pursuance of

the advertisements dated 14/1/2003 and 26/5/2006. The petitioners also

seek a direction against the respondent no.1 Zilla Parishad to consider the

claim of the petitioners for the posts of Contract Gram Sevaks in

pursuance of the aforesaid advertisements.

Though this Court had issued rule in the writ petition, no

interim relief was granted in favour of the petitioners.

By the advertisements issued by the respondent no.1 Zilla

Parishad in the year 2003 and 2006, applications were invited for

appointment on the posts of Contract Gram Sevak on a fixed honorarium.

The advertisements provided that the reservation of the posts was made.

When the petitioners had applied in the year 2003, they were more than

30-35 years of age. As per the advertisements, the upper age limit of the

candidates belonging to the reserved categories was 35 years. The

petitioners must have attained the age of 40 years as on date. By the

concerned advertisements, appointments were sought to be made only on

contractual basis for a period of eleven months. A direction cannot be

issued against the respondent no.1 Zilla Parishad to properly apply the

caste based reservation in the absence of any advertisement issued by it

3 wp5056.05

after 2006. As and when an advertisement is issued, the petitioners are

entitled to challenge the same, if at all they are eligible for appointment

and if posts are not earmarked for the candidates belonging to the

reserved categories, in accordance with law.

Since the cause of action for filing the writ petition is rendered

infructuous due to passage of time, we dispose of the writ petition with no

order as to costs. Rule stands discharged.

                       JUDGE                                                    JUDGE
                                

    khj
      
   







 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IDRC

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter