The Bombay High Court dismissed a writ petition challenging the MAAT's dismissal of a dismissal of an Original Application. The court held the petitioner could not claim reservation benefits again after already availing them as a Clerk.
Writ petition dismissed with 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.
1
1507wp2365.13.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
Writ Petition No.2365 of 2013 (Pradeepkumar Indal Bhimte v. The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai, and others)
Office Notes, Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders or directions Court's or Judge's orders and Registrar's order
Shri G.G. Bade, Counsel for Petitioner. Shri N.R. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents.
Coram : Smt. Vasanti A. Naik & V.K. Jadhav, JJ. Dated : 15th July, 2014
By this petition, the petitioner impugns the order of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 10-10-2012 dismissing an Original Application filed by the petitioner.
The petitioner had retired from Defence Service in the year 1998 and had applied for grant of employment in the Civil Service from Ex Serviceman category. The petitioner was appointed as a Clerk in the office of the Superintendent of Police, Gondia on 17-11-2009. After availing the benefit of reservation meant for Ex Serviceman category, the petitioner again applied for the post of Talathi from the same category in pursuance of an advertisement. Since the person selected for appointment on the post of Talathi had not joined, the petitioner asked the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Talathi. The respondents, however, refused to grant appointment
2
1507wp2365.13.odt
to the petitioner on the post of Talathi. The petitioner filed an Original Application against the refusal on the part of the respondents to appoint the petitioner on the post of Talathi. The Original Application was, however, dismissed by the impugned order dated 10-10-2012.
On hearing the learned counsel for the parties and on a perusal of the impugned order dated 10-10-2012, it appears that there is no scope for interference with the impugned order in exercise of the writ jurisdiction. The respondents had rightly placed reliance on the Government Resolution dated 30-12-1991 while refusing to grant appointment to the petitioner on the post of Talathi reserved for the Ex Serviceman category. Having once availed the benefit of reservation meant for Ex-Serviceman category, the petitioner could not have again applied for appointment on a post reserved for that category in view of the policy in the Government Resolution dated 30-12-1991. Since the petitioner could not have applied for the post of Talathi reserved for the Ex-Serviceman category, as he was already appointed as a Clerk in the office of the Superintendent of Police on a post earmarked for the same category, the Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Original Application filed by the petitioner.
Since the order of the Tribunal is just and proper, the petition is dismissed with no order as to costs.
Judge
Judge
pdl
2 issues framed by the court
Whether a retired Defence serviceman who availed reservation for Ex Serviceman category by appointing as a Clerk can again claim appointment in a post reserved for the same category.
Whether the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal was justified in dismissing the Original Application seeking appointment as a Talathi.
Pradeepkumar Indal Bhimte
The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Revenue Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai
Vasanti A. Naik
V.K. Jadhav
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
