Dismissed

Mohan Apparao Jadhao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Public Health, Mumbai and 2 Others

Bombay HC16 Dec 2015WP/4486/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court held a Writ Petition filed against the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's order regarding the petitioner's erroneous shortlisting for Deputy Director of Health Services. The court found no necessity to interfere as the Tribunal had granted liberty to proceed with selection under revised criteria. The writ petition was dismissed.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was disposed of without interference with the findings of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.

Mohan Apparao Jadhao Vs State of Maharashtra, through… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

1/2

¶2

1612wp4486.14.odt

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 4486 OF 2014

¶5

(Mohan Apparao Jadhao Vs. State of Maharashtra & others)

¶6

- - - - -- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Shri N. D. Thombre, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri B. M. Lonare, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. Shri N. R. Saboo, Advocate for respondent No.3.

¶7

CORAM : B. R. GAVAI AND

¶8

P. N. DESHMUKH, JJ. DATED : 16 DECEMBER, 2015

¶9

Heard the learned Counsel for the respective parties.

¶10

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the order passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dated 03/4/2014 thereby holding that the petitioner was erroneously shortlisted for participation in the interview for the post of Deputy Director of Health Services from the open category. The perusal of order passed by the Tribunal would reveal that the learned Tribunal in sub-para (e) of paragraph-18 of the order has considered the comparative pay scales of the candidates who were in Class-I and Class-II cadre. The learned Tribunal hold that the pay scale of the petitioner was that of Class-II cadre. In that view of the matter, since the findings of

¶11

2/2

¶12

1612wp4486.14.odt

¶13

the learned Tribunal are on the material placed on record, we do not find it necessary to interfere with the same. In any case, the learned Tribunal itself has granted liberty to proceed with the selection and appointments to the posts in Open (General) and S. C. (General) category. The learned Tribunal has also granted liberty to the M.P.S.C. to redetermine shortlisting criteria so that the requisite number of candidates will be called for the interview.

¶14

In that view of the matter, we do not find necessary to interfere with the findings of the learned Tribunal. But, we make it clear that any observations made by the learned Tribunal would not come in the way of the petitioner, if in the revised shortlisting criteria as directed by the learned Tribunal, the petitioner is found to be eligible for calling him for interview for the said post. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶15

JUDGE JUDGE

¶16

wwl

Mohan Apparao Jadhao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Public Health, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohan Apparao Jadhao v. State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Public Health, Mumbai and 2 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shyamsunder Abaji Parate Vs State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary Ministry of Health, Mumbai and 4 Others

Dyaneshwar S/O Gulabrao Sarkate and Another Vs State of Maharshtra, through Its Secretary, Dept. of Revenue, Mumbai and 5 Others

Prashant S/O Narayanrao Kimmatkar Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Tourisum, Mumbai and 2 Others

Manisha Aniruddha Mahatme and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Others

Suresh Raghoba Bhowate and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary School Education and Sports Deptt., Mumbai and 3 Others

Dilip Vinayakrao Kalamkar and Others Vs Mr. Nandkumar, Secretary School Education and Sports Deptt., Mumbai and 3 Others