Disposed

Shri P.G. Sakhre and 5 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Department of School Education (Primary), Thr. Its Principal Secretary and 2

Bombay HC22 Jun 2016CAW/955/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of a civil application and a writ petition challenging seniority lists of Assistant Teachers. The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous following a prior order directing the Zilla Parishad to prepare the seniority list.

What did the court decide?

The order dated 23.03.2016 in the civil application is recalled, and Writ Petition No. 5245 of 2012 is restored back to file before being disposed of as infructuous.

Shri P.G. Sakhre and 5 Others Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

¶2

2206caw955.16

¶3

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

¶4

CAW NO. 955/2016 AND WRIT PETITION NO. 5245 OF 2012

¶5

(Shri P.G. Sakhre & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra, Department of School (Primary) thr. its Principal Secretary & Ors.)

¶6

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

¶7

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI & KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ. JUNE 22, 2016.

¶8

CAW NO. 955 OF 2016

¶9

Heard Mrs. U.A. Patil, learned counsel for the applicants/ petitioners, Shri N.R. Patil, learned AGP for respondent No. 1 and Shri Sachin Zoting, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

¶10

As the respective counsel are ready and willing to argue the matter finally, the prayer is granted. The order dated 23.03.2016 is recalled and Writ Petition No. 5245 of 2012 is restored back to file.

¶11

Civil Application is disposed of accordingly.

¶12

WRIT PETITION NO. 5245 OF 2012

¶13

Heard Mrs. U.A. Patil, learned counsel for the petitioners, Shri N.R. Patil, learned AGP for respondent No. 1 and Shri Sachin Zoting, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 & 3.

¶14

The prayer in writ petition is to quash and set

¶15

¶16

2206caw955.16

¶17

aside the seniority lists prepared by Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 – Zilla Parishad, for granting benefit of Higher pay-scale of Rs.5500-9000 right from 2001 to 2011 and to prepare a fresh seniority list of the Assistant Teachers working in Primary Schools teaching Standards I to VII on the basis of date of acquisition of B.Ed. qualification.

¶18

It is not in dispute that Writ Petition No. 4183 of 2015 ( Yashwant Bhiwaji Shende vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors .) has been disposed of by this Court on 20.04.2016 and there, after hearing the respective counsel, Respondent No. 2 – Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli, has been asked to undertake the exercise of drawing seniority list in accordance with law and to complete it within a period of 3½ months from that day.

¶19

In this situation, it is apparent that the challenge in present writ petition is rendered infructuous. It is accordingly disposed of by keeping all rival contentions open. No order as to costs.

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

JUDGE

¶22

*GS.

Shri P.G. Sakhre and 5 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Department of School Education (Primary), Thr. Its Principal Secretary and 2

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri P.G. Sakhre and 5 Others v. State of Maharashtra, Department of School Education (Primary), Thr. Its Principal Secretary and 2

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

Sharad S/O Namdeoappa Paraswar Vs Shri. Nandkumar Principal Secretary, Dept of School Education, Mantralaya, Mumbai and Others

Vishal Rice Mill, through Its Proprietor Purushottam M. Dengani, Gadchiroli Vs State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Tribal Welfare Department, Mumbai and 5 Others

M/S Linksons Projects and Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., through Its Director, Gaurav Y. Sangla and 2 Vs the Authorised Officer, Pusad Urban Co-Op Bank Ltd., Pusad

Jagdish S/O Manikrao Khairkar Vs the Executive Director, Region Iii, Maha. State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd., and 2 Others

M/S. Nagpur Distillers, through Its Managing Partner Vs the State of Maharashtra, through the Department of Urban Devp. Mantralaya and 3 Others

Sau. Mandakini Bhaskarrao Jeevankar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary, Revenue and Forest Deptt., Mumbai and Others