Bombay High Court
Ashfaque Ahmad Mohd.Ayyub vs The State Of Maharashtra & 2 on 21 September, 2017
Bench: Ravi K. Deshpande
1 wp2593&2612.02.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 2593 OF 2002
Abdul Majeed S/o. Sheikh Abdullah,
Aged about 30 years, Occ. : Service,
R/o. Mana, Tahsil - Murtizapur,
District - Akola. ... PETITIONER
.. Versus ..
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Akola,
District - Akola.
3. The Chairman / Secretary,
District Selection Committee,
Akola. ... RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mr. R.D. Karode, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Malokar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. B.M. Lonare, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 3.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 2612 OF 2002
Ashfaque Ahmad s/o. Mohd. Ayyub,
Aged about 28 years, Occ. : Service,
R/o. Mana, Tahsil - Murtizapur,
District - Akola. ... PETITIONER
.. Versus ..
::: Uploaded on - 27/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 28/09/2017 00:55:32 :::
2 wp2593&2612.02.odt
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Secretary,
Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Akola,
District - Akola.
3. The Chairman / Secretary,
District Selection Committee,
Akola. ... RESPONDENTS
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Mr. R.D. Karode, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. K.S. Malokar, Advocate for Respondent No.2.
Mr. Vinod Thakare, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 3.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
CORAM : R.K. DESHPANDE &
MANISH PITALE, JJ.
DATED : September 21, 2017.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER R.K. DESHPANDE, J.)
The petitioners in both these petitions were
appointed as Shikshan-Sevak against the post reserved for
Scheduled Caste candidates. Both the petitioners claimed
that they belong Khatik Caste, which comes under
Scheduled Caste category. The claim was invalidated by
the Scrutiny Committee.
2. In the decision of this Court rendered at
3 wp2593&2612.02.odt
Aurangabad in W.P. No.3682/2000, it is held that Muslim
Khatik are not entitled to the appointment against the post
reserved for Scheduled Caste category. The State
Government therefore, issued resolution dated 07.12.2001
directing adjustment of such appointees against the post
available for open candidates. Since the petitioners
apprehended the termination, filed these writ petitions
claiming protection on the basis of Government Resolution
dated 07.12.2001.
3. It is informed to us that the claims of several
such candidates have been considered for protection in
service on the basis of Government Resolution dated
31.12.2001. In view of this, we do not find any
impediment in giving direction to respondent No.2 to
consider the case of the petitioners also in the light of
Government Resolution dated 07.12.2001.
4. In view of above, these writ petitions are partly
allowed. The respondent No.2 is directed to consider the
case of the petitioners for adjustment against the vacancies
for the open candidates in terms of Government Resolution
4 wp2593&2612.02.odt
dated 07.12.2001, if permissible, in accordance with law.
JUDGE JUDGE
waghmare
