Dismissed

Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Reveneu and Ors. v. Mahesh Kumar Mahto and Ors.

Bombay HC10 Mar 2014WP/2334/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Bench allowed the petition to be disposed of without expressing an opinion on merits. It directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to decide the issue regarding seniority of 61 posts within four weeks and referred to the Supreme Court case on seniority.

What did the court decide?

Tribunal directed to dispose of Original Application No. 741 of 2013 and interim application within four weeks.

Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

skc

¶2

WP-2334-14

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 2334 OF 2014

¶5

Union of India & Ors.	..	Petitioners
vs.
Mahesh Kumar Mahto son of
Babu Chand Mahto & Ors.	..	Respondents

¶6

Mrs. Neeta V. Masurkar with Mr. V. S. Masurkar for Petitioners. Mr. Rahul Walia for Respondent Nos. 7, 9 and 10.

¶7

CORAM : ANOOP V. MOHTA AND M. S. SONAK, JJ.

¶8

DATE: March 10, 2014

¶9

P.C . :-

¶10

1] The Petitioners have challenged the impugned ad interim orders dated 10.12.2013 and 17.12.2013 whereby the learned Tribunal Member, at this stage, pending the hearing of the matter on next date, directed the Respondents to approach and pursue and follow up the matter with the DoPT and take a decision in the meantime as to the manner in which they are going to implement the law laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. N. R. Parmar [2013(2) Services Case Today 287] though deals with the seniority with the direct recruits and promotees.

¶11

2] Statement is made by referring to an Office Memorandum

1/2

skc

WP-2334-14

dated 04.03.2014 issued by the Respondents – Government of India (DoPT) dealing with the same which was definitely not before the Tribunal when the impugned orders were passed. Therefore, without expressing anything on merits, we are inclined to dispose of the present petition with direction to the Tribunal to decide the issue as it required to deal with the seniority and 61 posts of Superintendent and Appraisers of Customs. Both the learned counsel make statements that they will co-operate and proceed to assist early disposal of the matter.

¶16

3] By keeping all the points open, the petition is accordingly disposed of. The learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench, Mumbai, is directed to endeavour to dispose of the Original Application No. 741 of 2013 as well as interim application, if any, preferably within four weeks. No costs.

¶17

4] Parties to act on the basis of an authenticated copy of this order.

¶18

(M. S. SONAK, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

¶19

Chandka

¶20

2/2

Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Reveneu and Ors. v. Mahesh Kumar Mahto and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India through Revenue Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Reveneu and Ors. v. Mahesh Kumar Mahto and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sidram Nilappa Koli Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.

Khurche Rajendra Dashrath Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.

Mrs. Pushpa Ramesh Tagare and Ors. Vs Mr. Rajiv Madhav Madane and Anr.

Amol Ashok Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.

Shamrao Sakharam Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Dept and Ors.

Amol Ashok Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.