Disposed

Bhavana Harishchandra Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Bombay HC27 Jun 2018WP/1592/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of this writ petition challenging the petitioner's non-selection as a Member of the Industrial Court. Upon receiving a letter from the Registrar affirming that future selection processes would adhere to then-prevailing eligibility criteria, the Court held the grievance regarding future appointments was assuaged and the petition was set aside without the need to keep it pending.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition is disposed of as the grievance regarding future appointments is assuaged by the Registrar's letter.

Bhavana Harishchandra Mhatre Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

15-wp.1592.2017.doc

1/3

nsc.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶5

WRIT PETITION NO.1592 OF 2017

¶6

Bhavana Harishchandra Mhatre ...Petitioner Versus State of Maharashtra and Anr. ...Respondents

¶7

Mr.Mihir Desai, Senior Advocate i/b Anubha Rastogi, for the Petitioner.

¶8

Mr.L.T.Satelkar, AGP for the Respondent No.1.

¶9

Mr.Rahul Nerlekar, for the Respondent No.2.

¶10

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & REVATI MOHITE DERE, JJ.

¶11

DATE : 27^th JUNE, 2018

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

The communications dated 27^th October, 2016 and 7^th October, 2016 of the State Government and the learned Registrar General of this Court, informing the Petitioner of her unsuitability for selection to the post

¶14

of Member, Industrial Court is taken exception to by way of the above Writ Petition.

¶15

15-wp.1592.2017.doc

¶16

2/3

¶17

The learned Senior Counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner is not much concerned about her non-selection to the said post of Member, Industrial Court, but is concerned with the fact that the basis for her non-selection should not come in the way of the Petitioner in her future pursuits for a judicial appointment.

¶18

We had therefore requested the learned counsel for the Respondent No.2 Mr. Nerlekar to seek instructions in that regard. The learned counsel has tendered today a letter dated 6^th March, 2018 addressed to him by the learned Registrar (Legal & Research) of this Court. The contents of the said letter can be gainfully reproduced herein under for the sake of ready reference:-

¶19

'With reference to the subject noted above and the letter under reference, I am directed to inform that the future selection process for Judicial post will be subject to the eligibility criteria as prevalent at that time and the eligibility of Petitioner i.e. Ms.Bhavana H. Mhatre will be tested on those parameters, if she applies for any Judicial post in future.'

¶20

15-wp.1592.2017.doc

¶21

3/3

¶22

Hence, having regard to the contents of the said letter, we are of the view that the grievance of the Petitioner in respect of her future pursuits for appointment to a Judicial post, stands assuaged as it has been stated that the Petitioner would be considered, subject to the eligibility criteria prevailing at that time and the eligibility of the Petitioner would be tested on the basis of the said parameters.

¶23

Hence, in view of the said letter, it is not necessary to keep the above Writ Petition pending. The same to accordingly stand disposed of.

¶24

The letter dated 6^th March, 2018, is taken on record and marked as “X' for identification.

¶25

(REVATI MOHITE DERE, J.) (R. M. SAVANT, J.)

Bhavana Harishchandra Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bhavana Harishchandra Mhatre v. State of Maharashtra and Anr.

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

Harshawardhan Shrikrishna Dole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Rajaram Bacharam Yesre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Jahid Ali Nashi Ali Shaikh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Jagannath Ambadas Pawar and Ors. Vs Bharat Bhagwan Pawar and Anr.

Shyam Nagu Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anr.

Shivam Social Circle through Its Owner Mr.Ashok Satya Akul Vs the Senior Inspector of Police and Ors.