Sakharam Pandurang Jagtap And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 11791 Bom

Bombay High Court

Sakharam Pandurang Jagtap And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 28 November, 2023

Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge

Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge

2023:BHC-AUG:25283-DB


                                                                   41-WP-567-2021-judgment.odt




                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                         WRIT PETITION NO.567 OF 2021

                 1.       Sakharam S/o Pandurang Jagtap
                          Age: 46 years, Occu: Service,
                          R/o. Khadakwadi, Post: Nirgudi,
                          Tq. Patoda, Dist. Beed

                 2.       Balaprasad s/o Bhagwandas Vaishnav
                          Age: 49 years, Occu: Service,
                          R/o. Eknath Nagar, Bhakti Construction,
                          Beed, Tq. & Dist. Beed

                 3.       Shaikh Jahir Usman
                          Age: 50 years, Occu: Service,
                          R/o Behind Mane Petrol Pump,
                          Champavati Nagar, Hajira Manzil,
                          Barshi Road, Beed, Tq. And Dist. Beed       ... PETITIONERS

                                  VERSUS

                 1.       The State of Maharashtra
                          Through Secretary,
                          Skilled Development Department,
                          Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

                 2.     The Joint Director,
                        Vocational Education and Training
                        Regional Office, Bhadkal Gate,
                        Aurangabad, Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad ... RESPONDENTS
                                                 ....
                 Mr. D. A. Karnik, Advocate h/f Mr. Vivek Dhage, Advocate for
                 Petitioners
                 Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 - State
                                                 ....



                                                                                           1 of 3




                ::: Uploaded on - 05/12/2023                 ::: Downloaded on - 28/02/2024 04:03:03 :::
                                          (( 2 ))         41-WP-567-2021-judgment




                               CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
                                       Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, JJ.

                                DATE : 28.11.2023


ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) :-

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally

by the consent of the parties.

2. The Petitioner No.1 was before the learned Maharashtra

Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No.781 of 1999. By a common order

dated 04.09.2009 passed by the learned Tribunal, the order of the

Deputy Director, Aurangabad dated 27.01.2000, based on the General

Administration Department's Resolution dated 08.03.1999, was

considered and the Original Applications were disposed off as

infructuous. The statement that the Petitioner was absorbed /

regularised in service, was accepted.

3. The Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 have never approached the

learned Tribunal and have approached this Court, along with

Petitioner No.1, without there being any order passed by the learned

Tribunal in their favour, since they were never before the learned

Tribunal.

                                                                                    2 of 3





                                         (( 3 ))         41-WP-567-2021-judgment

4. We, therefore, grant liberty to Petitioner Nos. 2 and 3 to

approach the learned Tribunal for seeking similar reliefs and

therefore, their names stand deleted from this Petition.

5. The sole Petitioner's prayer before this Court is that the

regularisation of service should be w.e.f. 08.03.1999 and not

13.12.1999.

6. We find that this issue is no longer res-integra in the light

of the judgment delivered by this Court dated 29.06.2017 (Coram:

Anoop V. Mohta and Sunil K. Kotwal, JJ.) in Writ Petition No. 4519 of

2016, filed at Aurangabad, thereby concluding that the date of

regularisation of such employee should be 08.03.1999.

7. In view of the above, this Petition is allowed. The date of

regularisation of the Petitioner Sakharam Pandurang Jagtap shall be

deemed to be 08.03.1999. Rule is made absolute, accordingly.

[ Y. G. KHOBRAGADE, J. ] [ RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J. ]

SMS

3 of 3