Ratnakar Premlal Chandrikapure vs Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran, ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 10054 Bom

                                                                                        1
                                                                           wp6614.2019.odt

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

                               WRIT PETITION NO.6614/2019

 Ratnakar Premlal Chandrikapure,
 aged about 55 Yrs., Occ. Service,
 R/o Near Bengali School, Railtoli,
 Gondia                                                                         ..Petitioner.

          ..Vs..

 1.       Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran,
          4th Floor, Express Towers, Nariman
          Point, Mumbai, through its Member
          Secretary.

 2.       Chief Administrative Officer,
          Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran,
          CIDCO Bhavan, South Wing, 2nd
          Floor, Belapur, Navi Mumbai.

 3.       Superintending Engineer,
          Maharashtra Jeevan Pradhikaran
          Circle, Near C.P. Club, Temple Road,
          Civil Lines, Nagpur.

 4.       State of Maharashtra, through its
          Secretary Department of Water Supply
          and Sanitation, G.T. Hospital Building,
          Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai.                                        ..Respondents.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri P.D. Meghe, Advocate for the petitioner.
 Ms N.P. Mehta, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3.
 Shri D.M. Kakani, Advocate for respondent No.4.
 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                           CORAM :- SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
                                            ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

DATED :- 30.7.2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.) Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally

by consent.

wp6614.2019.odt

2. Now, the petitioner has given his options for being posted and

his options are for Nagpur and Wardha. The respondents are also

willing to consider such request of the petitioner, provided vacancies

are available.

3. Shri Meghe, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

vacancies are indeed available at Nagpur. If that is the case, it would

be appropriate that this Court issues specific directions to the

respondents.

4. Accordingly, the petition is partly allowed. The respondents are

directed to consider and grant the fresh request of the petitioner for

his being transferred to Nagpur or Wardha as per his application dated

5th April, 2021, if vacancies are available at all or in any of these cases.

Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

5. CIVIL APPLICATION (CAW) NO.1009/2021.

In view of the disposal of writ petition, this application does not

survive and is disposed of accordingly. No costs.

                               JUDGE                                 JUDGE




 Tambaskar.