Dr.Sandeep Madhusudan Agrawal vs State Of Maharashtra And Anr
2017 Latest Caselaw 2689 Bom

                                                                                  1                                                                wp3893.02

                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                 NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR


                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.3893/2002

Dr. Sandeep S/o Madhusudan Agrawal, 
aged about 31 Yrs., Occu. Service, 
R/o 80, Gandhi Nagar, Nagpur.                                                                                                                                   ..Petitioner.

                 ..Vs..

1.               The State of Maharashtra,
                 through its Secretary, 
                 Department of Medical Education &
                 Research, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32. 

2.               Dean,
                 Government Medical College and 
                 Superior Specialty Hospital, 
                 Nagpur.                                                                                                                           ..Respondents.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

None for the petitioner.

Shri N.R. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 and 2.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND Z.A.HAQ JJ. DATED : 31.05.2017.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.P. Dharmadhikari, J.)

1. Learned A.G.P. points that matter should have been disposed of on

29th May, 2017 along with Writ Petition Nos.1251/2002 and 1367/2002 and

other connected matters.

2. Accordingly, for reasons recorded in order passed on 29 th May, 2017

2 wp3893.02

we partly allow this writ petition with following directions:

(i) Writ petition is partly allowed.

We declare that the petitioner, who is ad hoc appointee shall not be

replaced by any another set of ad hoc appointee, whether bounded or

non-bonded.

(ii) To the extent the orders passed by the Maharashtra Administrative

Tribunal are in conflict with the above declarations, they shall stand quashed

and set aside.

(iii) We reject the claim of the petitioner who is ad hoc appointee, to

regularization. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be no

orders as to costs.

                                                     JUDGE                                        JUDGE




Tambaskar.