Monday, 04, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Dakram S/O Tukara Kohade vs The State Of Maharashtra,Through ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7955 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 7955 Bom
Judgement Date : 17 August, 2022

Bombay High Court
Dakram S/O Tukara Kohade vs The State Of Maharashtra,Through ... on 17 August, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Urmila Sachin Phalke
Judgment

                                                              wp462.20 5

                                   1

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

                  WRIT PETITION NO.462 OF 2020

Dakram s/o Tukaram Kohade,
Aged about 46 years, occupation service,
R/o Behind Chemist Bhavan,
Chamorshi Road, Gadchiroli,
District Gadchiroli.                ..... Petitioner.

                          :: V E R S U S ::



1. The State of Maharashtra,
Through its Chief Secretary,
General Administration Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

2. Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli.        ..... Respondents.
=========================================
Shri S.R. Narnaware, Counsel for the Petitioner.
Mrs.K.S.Joshi, Incharge Government Pleader for respondent No.1/
State.
Shri A.W.Paunikar, Counsel for Respondent No.2.
=========================================

CORAM        : A.S.CHANDURKAR & URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.
DATE         : 17/08/2022

ORAL JUDGMENT : (Per : Urmila Joshi-Phalke, J.)

1.           RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard

learned Counsel for the parties.


2.           The petitioner is appointed as 'Assistant Teacher' with

the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli on 14.2.2000. Since he claims benefit

of reservation, his tribe certificate was referred for verification. The



                                                                 .....2/-
 Judgment

                                                             wp462.20 5

                                     2

Scrutiny Committee invalidated the tribe certificate. The petitioner

challenged that order in Writ Petition No.4846/2009. This Court did

not interfere with the order of the Scrutiny Committee but granted

protection to the said petitioner's services. The petitioner filed Writ

Petition No.898/2012 and a similar order protecting his services was

passed on 20.9.2013.        Since the Zilla Parishad on 24.12.2019

placed the petitioner on a supernumerary post, he has challenged

that notice in this Writ Petition.


3.           It is seen that with regard to the Assistant Teachers

from the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli itself, this Court had an occasion

to consider a similar action taken by the Zilla Parishad of placing

the Assistant Teachers on a supernumerary post. After considering

the judgment of the Aurangabad Bench in Writ Petition No.

903/2020 (Raja Tukaram Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra and

another) decided on 4/5/2021 with connected Writ Petitions, the

order placing those Assistant Teachers on a supernumerary post

was set aside and it was held that they are entitled to continue in

service on the basis of the earlier orders of protection. The said

orders have been passed in Writ Petition No.411/2020 ( Sau.

Heerabai w/o Nandkishor Sonkusare (Ku. Heerabai D/o Mahadeo

Sorte) Vs. The State of Maharashtra and another) and Writ Petition




                                                                .....3/-
 Judgment

                                                              wp462.20 5

                                    3

No. 416/2020 (Kishor S/o Laxman Sonkusare Vs. The State of

Maharashtra and another) decided on 15/12/2021.


4.            In these facts, as the petitioner is similarly situated and

the ratio of the decision in Raja Tukaram Shinde (supra) applies to

the case in hand, the petitioner will be entitled for similar relief.

Hence for the reasons contained in the decision in Raja Tukaram

Shinde (supra) as well as in Writ Petition Nos.411/2020 and

416/2020, the following order is passed :


                                 ORDER

(1) The order dated 24.12.2019 issued by respondent No.2

appointing the petitioner on a supernumerary post is set aside.

(2) The petitioner is entitled to continue in employment in terms of

the earlier orders of protection that was passed in Writ Petition

No.898/2012.

(3) Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)

!! BrWankhede !!

...../-

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter