Dismissed

Padmanabh S/O Gajrajsingh Thakur v. the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Anr.

Bombay HC10 Aug 2012PIL/38/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A PIL was filed mandamus for appointing staff to the Charity Commissioner office. Respondents filed an affidavit showing 197 of 233 posts were filled and gave an undertaking to complete recruitment. The court accepted this and permitted the petitioner to withdraw the petition.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner permitted to withdraw the PIL as the relief prayed for was substantially granted.

Padmanabh S/O Gajrajsingh Thakur Vs the State… — Public Procurement and Tenders | Bombay HC (2012)

¶1

1 pil38.12.odt

¶2

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

¶3

Public Interest Litigation No.38 of 2012

¶4

Padmanabh G.Thakur Vs. The State of Mah. and another

¶5

.............................................................................................................................................. Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's order of directions and Registrar's orders

¶6

Shri S.J.Khandalkar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri Nitin Sambre, GP for Respondents.

¶7

CORAM : P. V. HARDAS & M. L. TAHALIYANI, JJ. DATE : 10^th AUGUST, 2012.

¶8

This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying therein for issuing of the writ mandamus directing the respondents to appoint adequate staff in the office of the Assistant Charity Commissioner, Nagpur.

¶9

In response to the notice issued by this Court, the respondents have filed affidavit-inreply. In the affidavit-in-reply at paragraph nos.3 and 4, the respondents have stated that out of total vacancies of 233 posts, 197 posts have already been filled. We reproduce the contents of paragraph nos.3 and 4 of the

.....2/-

2 pil38.12.odt

affidavit-in-reply--

Para : 3- “I humbly submit that office of Charity Commissioner had published the advertisement for 233 posts, in various cadres from Peon to Superintendent on the establishment of Charity Organization in the month of December, 2009. The written examination was held by office of the Charity Commissioner. However, by Government Resolution, Finance Department dated 5.6.2010 bad was imposed on filling up the posts from the Group C and D and hence further process of appointment was held up. The copy of said Government Resolution dated 5.6.2010 is annexed hereto and marked as Annexure R-1 for kind perusal of this Hon’ble High Court.

¶14

Para : 4- I humbly submit that the Law and Judiciary Department considering the requirements obtained special permission from the High Power Committee of the State Government to fill up the said vacancies and by its communication dated 2^nd July, 2011, directed the Charity Organization to proceed with the process of selection of candidates against the vacant posts and complete the exercise by the end of December, 2011. Thereafter the process was initiated to fill up the vacant posts. Against the vacancy of 233 posts, 197 posts have already been filled up. Out

¶15

.....3/-

¶16

3 pil38.12.odt

¶17

of 197 candidates newly recruited candidates, 15 candidates are posted in the office of Joint Charity Commissioner, Nagpur. The true copy of order dated 13.12.2011 and 31.12.2011 are annexed herewith and marked as Annexure R-2 for kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court.

¶18

In view of this the grievance of petition no more subsist and therefore, petition is liable to be disposed of accordingly.”

¶19

The learned Government Pleader, in addition to the affidavit-in-reply, states that the process for filling up of the remaining posts would continue and would not be abandoned. We accept the aforesaid statement as an undertaking to this Court.

¶20

In the light of the said statement of the learned Government Pleader as well as the affidavit-in-reply, Shri Khandalkar, learned counsel for the petitioner, seeks to withdraw this petition as the relief, which the petitioner has prayed for in this petition, stands fully granted to the petitioner.

¶21

Accordingly, accepting the statement of the learned Government Pleader and the contents of

¶22

.....4/-

¶23

4 pil38.12.odt

¶24

the affidavit-in-reply, we permit the petitioner to withdraw this petition.

¶25

Accordingly, this Public Interest Litigation is dismissed as withdrawn. No costs.

¶26

JUDGE JUDGE

¶27

brw

¶28

...../-

Padmanabh S/O Gajrajsingh Thakur v. the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Padmanabh S/O Gajrajsingh Thakur v. the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S. Resources of Aviation Redressal Association Vs the Union of India and 2 Ors.

Bharat Vitthalrao Thite Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Shri. Ramchandra Warik Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Dept of Industrial Development and Ors.

Godavari Hatmag Vastra Nirman Sah Sanstha Vasarni Dist Nanded Thr President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Afak Anwar Mandaviya. Vs Dean of Sion Hospital Ms. Sandya Kamat and 5 Ors.

Maharashtra Tour and Travels and Bus Owners Association through Gen Secretary Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

V. P. Patil Vs Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice, Dept of Legal Affairs and Ors.

Kishwar Vajid Mirza Vs the Central Board of Movie Certificaiton and Anr.

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others Vs Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Nilesh S/O Rameshchandra Baheti and 3 Others Vs Shri Kamalkishore S/O Bulchand Baheti and 3 Others

Mohammad Shafique Mohammad Yakub @ Shafique Raja Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Secretary of Home Deptt. and Others

Bahuudeshiya Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Uva Sanstha Thr. Its President Vs the State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty. and Ors.

Babu Gulabrao Varma, C/7482 Vs the Divisional Commissioner Nagpur Division Nagpur and Another

Janmanch Thr. Its Secty., Rajeev Gajanan Jagtap Vs State of Mah. Thr. Its Secty., and Ors.