Bombay High Court
Rajendra Damodhar Daware vs State Of Mah.Thr.Secty. And 3 ... on 20 September, 2016
Bench: V.A. Naik
WP 4759/03 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION No. 4759/2003
Rajendra Damodhar Daware,
Aged about 42 years, Occ. Nil,
R/o Govt. Qtrs. Qtr. No.C-11/3,
Ravinagar, Nagpur. PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary
Department of Public Health,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. Director General, Health Services,
Saint George Hospital Campus,
Dental College Building, 4th Floor,
Mumbai.
3. Deputy Director of Health Services,
Nagpur Circle, Nagpur.
4. Child Development Project Officer,
Urban Project II, Gandhinagar,
Nagpur. RESPONDENTS
None for the petitioner.
Shri A.A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.
CORAM :SMT.VASANTI A NAIK AND
KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 20 TH
SEPTEMBER, 2016.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT.VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
By this writ petition, the petitioner challenges the order of the
Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Nagpur, dated 14.08.2003
dismissing the original application filed by the petitioner against the order
of his termination, dated 16.07.2002 and 25/26.07.2002, whereby the
petitioner was removed from service from the post of Medical Officer
Class-II.
WP 4759/03 2 Judgment
2. None appeared on behalf of the petitioner on 30.08.2016 and
none appears for the petitioner, today also. We have, therefore, heard the
learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents and have also
perused the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.
3. On a reading of the writ petition and the impugned order, it
appears that the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the original
application filed by the petitioner. The petitioner was temporarily
appointed as a Medical Officer Class-II, from time to time, and his
services were continued temporarily till 27.03.2002. According to the
petitioner, without serving any notice on the petitioner, his services
could not have been terminated and, therefore, he had challenged the
orders dated 16.07.2002 and 25/26.07.2002 before the Maharashtra
Administrative Tribunal. According to the petitioner, it was necessary for
the respondents to have conducted an enquiry against the petitioner
before terminating his services. It was also stated before the Tribunal that
the petitioner should have been continued in service, till a candidate duly
selected by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission, was appointed.
The Tribunal, however, found and rightly so, that the petitioner did not
have the right to seek the continuation of his services. The petitioner was
appointed purely on temporary basis and even according to the
appointment order, the services of the petitioner could have been
terminated and the petitioner could have been removed without the
WP 4759/03 3 Judgment
service of a notice on him. The Tribunal found that the post of Medical
Officer Class-II was a post, which could have been filled up only by the
recommendation of the Maharashtra Public Service Commission.
Admittedly, as the petitioner was not selected and recommended by the
Maharashtra Public Service Commission, he was not entitled to be
continued on the Class-II post in the health services that could have been
filled only by the appointment of a candidate recommended by the
Maharashtra Public Service Commission. The Tribunal relied on the
appointment order of the petitioner, which clearly showed that the
appointment of the petitioner was ad-hoc and temporary in nature and as
per Clauses 3 and 4 of the appointment order, his services could have
been terminated without giving a notice, as soon as a candidate duly
selected by the Maharashtra Public Service Commission was
recommended. The Tribunal held, on an appreciation of the material on
record, that there were some complaints against the petitioner and since
he was remaining absent unauthorizedly and was not performing his
duties from the headquarters, the respondent-Authorities rightly decided
not to continue him on the post of Medical Officer Class-II as his services
were not satisfactory. The order of the Tribunal appears to be just and
proper and does not call for any interference. Even otherwise, the orders
of the respondent-Authorities that were challenged before the Tribunal
were passed in the year 2002 and it appears that the petitioner did not
continue as a Medical Officer Class-II. Since some of the applications
WP 4759/03 4 Judgment
made by the petitioner in this Court for seeking interim relief were
rejected, the petitioner did not perform the duties of Medical Officer
Class-II after his termination in the year 2002.
4. Since no fault can be found with the order of the Tribunal, we
dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs. Rule stands
discharged.
JUDGE
ig JUDGE
APTE
WP 4759/03 5 Judgment
CERTIFICATE
I certify that this Judgment uploaded is a true and correct
copy of original signed Judgment.
Uploaded by: Rohit D. Apte. Uploaded on : 21.09.2016.
