Bombay High Court
Sau. Heerabai W/O Nandkishor ... vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ... on 15 December, 2021
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, G. A. Sanap
42 wp 411.2020.odt
1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO.411 OF 2020
1. Sau. Heerabai w/o Nandkishor
Sonkusare
[Ku. Heerabai D/o Mahadeo Sorte]
Aged about 49 yrs., Occ. Service,
R/o. At-Post-Armori,
Distt. Gadchiroli.
.... PETITIONER
// VERSUS //
1. The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary,
General Administration Deptt.,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parisad, Gadchiroli .... RESPONDENTS
Shri S.R. Narnaware, Advocate for petitioner.
Smt. Sangita Jachak, AGP for respondent No.1/State.
_____________________________________________________________
CORAM : A.S. CHANDURKAR, AND
G.A. SANAP, JJ.
DATE : 15.12.2021
ORAL JUDGMENT: (Per: A.S. CHANDURKAR J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally
with consent of learned counsel for the parties.
42 wp 411.2020.odt
2/4
2. The petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher
with Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli on a post that was reserved for
Scheduled Tribe candidate. The Tribe Certificate of the petitioner
was invalidated on 04.11.2011. The petitioner therefore
approached this Court challenging the said order in Writ Petition
No.5599/2011. By the judgment dated 18.10.2012 this Court
upheld the order of invalidation but protected the services of the
petitioner in respect of her initial appointment. It was made clear
that the petitioner would not be entitled for any promotion on
the basis of her claim of belonging to the Scheduled Tribe.
Thereafter on 21.12.2019 Government Resolution was issued by
the respondent No.1 seeking to implement the judgment of the
Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chairman and Managing
Director, Food Corporation of India and Others Vs. Jagdish
Balaram Bahira and Others. (2017) 8 SCC 670. In paragraph 4.3
thereof it has been held that in respect of employees whose
claims have been invalidated, they shall be placed on a
supernumerary posts for a period of eleven months. Acting on the
said Government Resolution the respondent No.2 issued an order
dated 26.12.2019 and placed the petitioner on a supernumerary
post. Being aggrieved the petitioner has challenged the same.
42 wp 411.2020.odt
3/4
3. Shri S.R. Narnaware, learned Advocate for the
petitioner submits that the issue arising in this Writ Petition has
been decided by the Aurangabad Bench of this Court in Writ
Petition No.903/2020 with connected Writ Petitions (Raja
Tukaram Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra, Tribal
Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai and another
with connected matters) on 04.05.2021. He submits that
Government Resolution dated 21.12.2019 has been directed to
be applied in a manner so as not to include employees whose
tribe-claims are invalidated but are granted protection in
employment by the orders of the Court. It is therefore, submitted
that similar course be followed and the order dated 26.12.2019
be set aside.
4. Smt. Sangeeta Jachak, Learned Assistant Government
Pleader for the respondent No.1 opposes the aforesaid
contention. It is submitted that the judgment referred to herein
above is sought to be challenged by the State Government before
the Hon'ble Supreme Court and hence the relief as prayed for
may not be granted.
42 wp 411.2020.odt
4/4
5. On perusing the judgment in Raja Tukaram Shinde
(supra) we find that this Court has held that in cases where
employment is protected by the orders of the Court and those
judgments have attained finality, Government Resolution dated
21.12.2019 could not be made applicable.
6. We are inclined to follow the aforesaid judgment of
Division Bench and hence for the reasons assigned in the said
judgment the following order is passed:-
ORDER
(i) The order dated 26.12.2019 issued by the respondent
No.2 appointing the petitioner on supernumerary post is set
aside.
(ii) The petitioner is entitled to continue in employment
in terms of the earlier order of protection that was passed in Writ
Petition No.5599/2011.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
manisha
Signed By:MANISHA ALOK
SHEWALE
Signing Date:17.12.2021 14:34
