Single judge of the Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the dismissal of an industrial dispute application by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal regarding the cancellation of a promotion order due to the petitioner's failure to join the post.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 6564 OF 2008
Rambhau Damodhar Shejwal ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
Mr. P.M.Pradhan, Advocate i/b. Mr. Ajit R.Pitale,
Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. V.S.Masurkar, Government Pleader, for the State.
CORAM: BILAL NAZKI & J.H.BHATIA,JJ.
DATE: 18th November, 2008.
P.C.
1. This Writ Petition has been filed challenging the
order of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in Original
Application No.13 of 2003 filed by the petitioner. The
Application has been dismissed.
2. Brief facts of the case are that before the
2
Tribunal the petitioner challenged the order dated
14.12.2002 passed by the Superintending Engineer,
Ghatghar Hydro Electric Power Circle & Zonal Office,
Nashik, cancelling the promotion order dated 27.5.2002
on the ground that the petitioner had not joined the
post to which he had been promoted within the time
specified in the order. He was asked to join within a
period of 30 days but he did not join and approached the
Minister and got the order of posting changed to another
place, but still he did not join.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits
that till 13th June, 2002, he had no information that he
was to join the promotional posting within one month,
but after receiving the order on 13.6.2002, he did not
join till 5.12.2002 even after the order of posting was
changed at the instance of the Minister. He did not
join even at the place where he was posted by order
dated 18.10.2002. On 11.11.2002, he made an application
for change of his posting. Before the application for
modification of posting, the Superintending Engineer and
Administrator, Command Area Development Authority,
Nashik, on 2.11.2002 issued a notice to the applicant
calling upon him to join the post within seven days from
the receipt of the notice dated 2.11.2002, but the
petitioner did not join and ultimately this promotional
3
order was rescinded. The petitioner was not, at any
point of time, interested in joining the promotional
post at a place of posting chosen by the Respondents but
he wanted promotion and posting of his choice which is
not possible. The Government waited for seven months
from the date of order of promotion for the petitioner
to join his posting and even at the changed posting, but
he did not join.
4. Therefore, we do not find that there is any merit
in the Writ Petition. The Tribunal was right in
dismissing the Original Application. The Writ Petition
is accordingly dismissed.
(BILALNAZKI,J.)
(J.H.BHATIA,J.)
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner displaced by the High Court from his choice of posting and the exercise of power by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.
If the petitioner show merit in the writ petition or if dismissal of the original application was right.
Rambhau Damodhar Shejwal
The State of Maharashtra
BILAL NAZKI
J.H.BHATIA
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court