Bombay High Court
Subhash Namadev Sabale And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 24 April, 2025
Author: A.S. Chandurkar
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar
2025:BHC-AS:19527-DB
903 WP-17649-2024 C.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
Digitally signed
by
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
HUSENBASHA
HUSENBASHA RAHAMAN
RAHAMAN NADAF
NADAF
Date:
2025.04.29
14:56:40 +0530 WRIT PETITION NO.17649 OF 2024
Subhash Namadev Sabale And Ors. ....Petitioners
V/s
The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. ....Respondents
***
Mr. Anil Sakhare, Senior Advocate i/b. Mr. Sachin Chandan & Mr. Suhas
Deokar, Mr. Atharv Gidye, & Mr. Tanmay M. Shembavanekar, Advocates
for Petitioners.
Mrs. Ashwini A. Purav, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent
Nos. 1 to 5.
Mr. Sandeep Dere (through V.C) a/w Ms. Sonali Pawar, Advocates for
Respondent No. 75.
***
CORAM: A.S. CHANDURKAR &
M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.
DATE : 24TH APRIL 2025
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per A.S. Chandurkar, J.)
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.
2. The petitioners are faced with a peculiar situation, since it is their
grievance that the Original Application filed by them before the
Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal ("Tribunal", for short) did not
conclude by redressing all their grievances on merit. Despite remand of
the proceedings by an earlier order, those grievances subsist.
3. Shortly stated, the petitioners claim to be recruited under Batch
No.102 and have been promoted on the post of Assistant Police
Inspector on 29.05.2014. They seek benefit of deemed date of
903 WP-17649-2024 C.doc
promotion on the post of Police-Sub-Inspector. Raising such grievance,
they approached the Tribunal by filing Original Application No.1226 of
2022. In the said Original Application, they made following prayers:-
a) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to issue order and/or direction
at it deems fit, and recall, set aside and/or modify the Order dated 23 rd
September 2022 along with its Speaking to Minutes dated 28 th
September 2022, passed in Original Application Nos. 557 of 2021 and
676 of 2021 and thereby holding that the Respondent Nos. 6 to 89 are
not entitled for deemed date granted pursuant to the captioned orders;
b) That this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to issue necessary direction to
the Respondent Nos. 1 to 5 to forthwith conduct and complete all
formalities with respect to the promotion of the Applicants to the post
of Police Inspector on or before 31st December 2022 in accordance
with law;
4. Initially, the Tribunal passed an interim order on 19.12.2022 and
referred to the list of 46 candidates, the petitioners herein, out of 200
who had availed the benefit of reservation in the light of Government
Resolution dated 07.05.2021. Miscellaneous Application No.711 of
2022 came to be disposed of by the order dated 19.12.2022. Thereafter,
the Tribunal disposed of Original Application No.1226 of 2022 on
08.11.2023. In paragraph Nos.10 and 11, it was observed as under:-
"10. For more clarity, we reproduce para 12 of the order of this
Tribunal dated 19.12.2022 in M.A 711/2022 in O.A 1226/2022:-
"The list given by affidavit dated 14.12.2022 marked Exh. 1 in
MA No. 711 of 2022 is to be considered. The implementation of
the order dated 23.9.2022 will not come in the way of granting
promotions to all the applicants except 46 mentioned in list no.
4 in the affidavit. Here we make it clear that we do not wish to
continue the stay for implementation of order further i.e.,
28.12.2022 as the stay to the promotions cannot remain for a
longer time in view of law and order. The post of P.I are to be
filled in at the earliest."
11. Thus, learned counsel for the applicants submit that the grievances
of the applicants are redressed and the application can be disposed of.
903 WP-17649-2024 C.doc
5. The petitioners not being satisfied with the aforesaid order
challenged the same in Writ Petition No.395 of 2024. By the order dated
21.06.2024 this Court observed in paragraph Nos.6 and 7, as under:-
"6. In paragraph no.11 of the impugned order, it has been
categorically recorded that the learned counsel for the petitioners
before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal had stated that the
grievance of the petitioners were redressed and the Original
Application could be disposed of. Assuming that the learned counsel
was not instructed to make that statement, even then it would be
necessary for the petitioners to approach the Maharashtra
Administrative Tribunal and seek adjudication of the proceedings on
merits. We are not inclined therefore, to consider the prayers made in
the Original Application as a court of first instance since the petitioners'
remedy lies before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. Moreover,
necessary factual adjudication is also for considering the petitioners
entitlement to relief as prayed for.
7. Thus, following law laid down in Ramdas Shrinivas Nayak & Anr
(supra), we are not inclined to entertain the writ petition on merits.
The Petitioners are at liberty to adopt the course as prescribed in the
aforesaid decision before the Tribunal. Keeping all contentions on
merits are open, the Writ Petition is disposed of as not entertained.
Needless to state that the time spent by the petitioners in this Court
while pursing the writ petition shall be taken into consideration if the
petitioners seek re-consideration of the order dated 8 November 2023."
6. Thereafter, the Tribunal re-considered the matter. On 30.07.2024
the Tribunal was of the view that what was recorded in the order dated
08.11.2023 was correct. As no application for Speaking to the
Minutes/Review was filed, it proceeded to dismiss Miscellaneous
Application No.448 of 2024. The petitioners being aggrieved by the said
order have filed present writ petition.
7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length. It can
be seen that the grievance raised by the petitioners as regards grant of a
deemed date has not been decided on merits. When the Original
Application was disposed of on 08.11.2023, the Tribunal recorded the
903 WP-17649-2024 C.doc
statement made on behalf of the petitioners that their grievances were
redressed in view of what was recorded in the order 19.12.2022. After
remand by this Court, the Tribunal declined to go into this aspect and
maintained the aforesaid observations. Proceeding on the basis that
what was recorded was correct, we find that the petitioners have been
deprived of consideration of their grievances on merits.
8. Be that as it may, in the present writ petition, reply has been filed
by the respondent No.4. In the paragraph No.7 of the reply, it has been
stated, as under:
"7. I say that the Hon'ble Tribunal disposed of the OA No.
1226/2022 by passing the final order dated 08/11/2023 and observed
that the promotions to PSIs of batch No.102 can be given except 46
PSIs who have taken the benefit of reservation. The paragraph no 9 of
the order dated 08/11/2023 shows that the order dated 08/11/2023
was passed with the consent of Advocate Shri. Dere who had appeared
for Respondents therein (applicants in OA 557/2021 and 676/2021).
Accordingly, as per the order dated 08/11/2023, this office issued
promotions to 168 APIs (PSI of batch No. 102 who were found fit on
the DPC dated 21/03/2023. The 46 API (PSI batch 102), who are
Petitioners in the present Petition, though found fit on the DPC dated
21/03/2023 were not given promotion as per the order of the Hon'ble
Tribunal dated 08/11/2023."
9. We are inclined to remit the proceedings to the Tribunal to
consider and decide Original Application No.1226 of 2022 afresh on its
own merits and in accordance with law. However, while doing so we
note the stand taken on behalf of the respondent No 4 - Director
General of Police in the affidavit dated 21.04.2025 that in the
Departmental Promotion Committee meeting held on 21.03.2023, the
present petitioners were found fit for being promoted. They were
however not promoted in view of the order of the Tribunal dated
08.11.2023.
10. We are, therefore, inclined to direct the respondent Nos.1 to 5 to
903 WP-17649-2024 C.doc
take further steps in accordance with recommendation of the
Departmental Promotion Committee meeting dated 21.03.2023 and
consider the eligibility of the petitioners for promotion, subject to the
petitioners satisfying the prescribed criteria including the requirements
of the Government Resolution dated 07.05.2021. This exercise would be
subject to outcome of Original Application No.1226 of 2022.
11. For the aforesaid reasons, the order dated 30.07.2024 passed by
the Tribunal in Original Application No.1226 of 2022 is set aside. The
Tribunal shall decide Original Application No.1226 of 2022 on its own
merits and in accordance with law.
12. All contentions of the parties on merits are kept open.
13. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms with no order as to
costs.
(M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
