Ravindra Wamanrao Khandezod vs State Of Mah., Through Secretary, ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 5663 Bom

 0408WP943.15-Judgment                                                                          1/2


              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                       WRIT PETITION NO.  943   OF    2015

 PETITIONER :-                        Ravindra Wamanrao Khandezod, aged about
                                      50 years, Occu. Service, R/o Dhawanewadi,
                                      Ward   No.3,   Dhamangaon   Rly.,   Tq.
                                      Dhamangaon, Dist. Amravati. 

                                         ...VERSUS... 

 RESPONDENTS :-                  1) State   of   Maharashtra   through   Secretary,
                                    Urban   Development   Deptt.   Mantralaya,
                                    Mumbai. 
                                 2) Director Municipal Administration, Bombay,
                                    Nagar  Parishad   Prashasan,   Sanchalanalaya,
                                    Shaskiya Parivahan Seva Emarat, 3rd  Floor,
                                    Sir Pochkhanwala Marg, Varli, Mumbai-400
                                    030. 
                                 3) Regioal Director, Mumcipal Administration,
                                    Amravati   Division   Amravati,   Camp
                                    Amravati. 

 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                      Mr.N.S.Bhelkar, counsel for the petitioner.
              Mr.I.J.Damle, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for the respondents.
 ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                        CORAM : SMT. VASANTI    A    NAIK & 
                                                    ARUN  D. UPADHYE
                                                                     ,   JJ.

DATED : 04.08.2017

O R A L J U D G M E N T (Per Smt.Vasanti A Naik, J.)

By this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a direction

against the respondent Nos.2 and 3 to grant the pay scale of Rs.5000-

8000/- to the petitioner.

0408WP943.15-Judgment 2/2

Shri Bhelkar, the learned counsel for the petitioner, states

that the grievance of the petitioner would stand redressed if the

respondent No.2 decides the representation of the petitioner dated

04/10/2014 at Annexure-J.

It would be proper for the respondent No.2 to first decide

the representation of the petitioner as nothing is placed by the parties

on record to show that apart from the fulfillment of the other

qualifications, the petitioner was holding a supervisory post that was

equivalent to the post of Estate Manager/Tax Inspector/Office

Superintendent that was required to be possessed for absorption in

grade C-I.

In the circumstances of the case, the the writ petition is

disposed of with a direction to the respondent No.2-Director of

Municipal Administration to decide the representation of the petitioner

within four months. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with

no order as to costs.

                        JUDGE                                               JUDGE 


 KHUNTE