Full Bench held relevant MEPS Rules provide preference not promotion. Petitioner's challenge to appointment of clerk respondents dismissed as he is not entitled to promotion.
Rule discharged. Petition dismissed. No order as to costs.
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.
wp-10258-10.sxw
1
dgm
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 10258 OF 2010
Nitin Charandas Meshram .... Petitioner vs Rail Child Organisation Kalyan and ors. .... Respondents
Mr. V.N. Tayade for the petitioner.
Mr. A.A. Garge for respondent no.1.
Mr. N.V.Bandivadekar for respondents 4 and 5.
Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP for respondent no.6.
CORAM: D. K. DESHMUKH & ANOOP V. MOHTA, JJ.
DATE : December 21, 2011
P.C.:
By this Petition, the Petitioner is challenging the appointment of Respondents 4 and 5 to the post of clerk. The gravamen of the Petition appears to be that because the Petitioner is working as a peon in the same institution and because he had improved his qualification, he was entitled to be promoted to the post of clerk. For that purpose,
wp-10258-10.sxw
2
he relies on a judgment of the Division of this Court in the case of R.S. Khairnar vs. State of Maharashtra, 2003 (4) Mh.L.J. 470 . By a judgment of Full Bench of this Court in the case of Tanaji Madhukar Barbade vs. State of Maharashtra, 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 901 , the above referred judgment of the Division Bench has been considered the relevant provisions of MEPS Rules and it has been held that the same does not provide for promotion. It only provides for preference to an employee who is already working in the institution. In this view of the matter, therefore, there is no substance in the petition. The Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged. No order as to costs.
(ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)
(D. K. DESHMUKH,J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a peon entitled to be promoted to clerk post despite Full Bench holding relevant MEPS Rules provide only for preference not promotion.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
R.S. Khairnar vs. State of MaharashtraReferred¶15
R.S. Khairnar vs. State of Maharashtra, 2003 (4) Mh.L.J. 470 · Who else cites this
Tanaji Madhukar Barbade vs. State of MaharashtraExplained¶15
Tanaji Madhukar Barbade vs. State of Maharashtra, 2010(6) Mh.L.J. 901 · Who else cites this
Nitin Charandas Meshram
Rail Child Organisation Kalyan
Respondents 4 and 5
Respondent 6
D. K. Deshmukh
Anoop V. Mota
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
