Disposed

Rupa Bharat Kasewad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC23 Jul 2013WP/2425/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a writ petition by a former employee seeking fresh appointment with continuity of service, the High Court at Aurangabad, impressed by the respondents' assurance of a fresh Class III appointment without back wages, accepted the petitioner's stipulation to drop her claim for continuity and back wages, thus disposing of the petition by consent with directions to issue a fresh order within four wee

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No.2 to issue necessary order of fresh appointment to the Petitioner within four weeks.

Rupa Bharat Kasewad Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2013)

¶1

WP-2425.12

¶2

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2425 OF 2012

¶5

Rupa d/o Bharat Kasewad,
age 23 years, occupation
service, r/o Hanuman Nagar,
Nanded, Dist. Nanded.

¶6

Petitioner

¶7

versus

¶8

1.The State of Maharashtra
through it's Secretary,
Home Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 400 032

¶9

2. The District Superintendent of Police, Nanded, Dist. Nanded. Respondents

¶10

Mr. Pravin B. Rakhunde, Adv. for Petitioner
Mrs. V.A. Shinde, A. G. P. for Respondents

¶11

CORAM : A. H. JOSHI AND
SUNIL P. DESHMUKH,JJ.
DATE : JULY 23, 2013

¶12

Oral Judgment (Per: Sunil P. Deshmukh, J.)

¶13

1.Rule. By consent, rule made returnable
forthwith and heard finally.

¶14

2. The petitioner states that he is satisfied with

¶15

the averments made on behalf of the Respondents in
paragraphs 3 and 4 of the affidavit in reply to the
writ petition, which read:-

¶16

¶17

WP-2425.12

¶18

"3. The Deponent most respectfully submit that
though the Petitioner has given ample
opportunity, the Petitioner did not submit
passing Certificates as mentioned in the
Appointment Order in stipulated period.
Therefore, her services came to be terminated.
The Hon'ble High Court has made a query whether
the State Government has any though to consider
the claim of the Petitioner for the appointment
in Class IV cadre. The deponent most
respectfully submits that the Respondent No. 2
is ready to give fresh appointment to the
Petitioner as a Class -III i.e. Junior Clerk as
there are 15 posts of Junior Clerks are vacant
in the Respondent No.2's Establishment.

¶19

4.The Deponent most respectfully say and
submit that the new appointment of the
Petitioner may kindly be considered as fresh
appointment and the Petitioner can not claim
continuation of service from the year 2008 or
any back wages. "

¶20

3.In view of the assurance given in averments in
paragraphs 3 and 4 of the affidavit in reply quoted
above, we direct Respondent No.2 to issue necessary
order in favour of the petitioner within a period of
four weeks from today.

¶21

¶22

WP-2425.12

¶23

4. In view of above, petitioner gives up his claim for continuity of service and back wages.

¶24

5. With aforesaid directions, writ petition stands disposed of. Rule made absolute, accordingly, with no order as to costs.

¶25

Office objections are dispensed with.

¶26

(SUNIL P. DESHMUKH, J.)(A. H. JOSHI, J.)

¶27

pnd

Rupa Bharat Kasewad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rupa Bharat Kasewad v. the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shobha Yeshwantrao Bhagyawant Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Tulshiram Bhagwanrao Kanade Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Suvarna Babulal Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shivdas Sambhaji Dhavale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Ashok Laxman Bhalerao Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Dr. Sayyed Akram Asif Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others