Disposed

Ganesh Pandurang Tandel and 243 Ors. v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Bombay HC12 Sept 2018WP/2739/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of a writ petition challenging the rejection of a 2009 waiting list for Class 'D' posts. The Court directed the Corporation to consider petitioners for future ad hoc appointments, noting there is no existing right.

What did the court decide?

Petition disposed with direction to consider petitioners for future ad hoc appointments to Class 'D' posts on the 2009 waiting list.

Ganesh Pandurang Tandel and 243 Ors. Vs the Municipal… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(909) WPL 2905-18.doc

¶2

Amk

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 2905 OF 2018

¶5

Ganesh Pandurang Tandel & Ors.

¶6

.. Petitioners

¶7

Vs.

¶8

The Municipal Corporation of Gr. Mumbai & Ors. .. Respondents

¶9

Dr. Abhinav Chandrachud a/w. Mr. Saurabh Pakale i/b Mr. S. S. Mohite for the Petitioners.

¶10

Mr. A. V. Sakholkar a/w. Mr. A. K. Nandanwar for the Respondent-MCGM.

¶11

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT &

¶12

K. K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 12th SEPTEMBER, 2018.

¶13

P. C.

¶14

The Petitioners are invoking the writ jurisdiction of this Court challenging the order dated 18.07.2018 passed by the Respondent No.1 i.e.

¶15

the Municipal Commissioner of the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai. By the said order, the request of the Petitioner for operating the waiting list of the year 2009 for the Class 'D' posts in the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai came to be rejected. The said rejection was on the ground that the said waiting list is outlived its life.

¶16

The learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Petitioners Dr. Chandrachud would however contend that in the event the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai decides to make any ad hoc appointments

¶17

1/2

¶18

(909) WPL 2905-18.doc

¶19

in future, the Petitioners who are admittedly in the wait list of the year 2009 for the said Class 'D' posts be considered of such appointment. The learned Counsel seeks to place reliance on the Judgment of the Apex Court reported in 1994 Supp (2) SCC 348 in the case of State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Mahabir Prasad Sharma & Ors. In the said case, the Apex Court upheld the directions of the Punjab and Haryana High Court directing the consideration of the candidates on the wait list in the event of any ad hoc appointment is being made de hors the rules. Hence, without dilating further on facts we are of the view that the above Petition can be conveniently disposed of by directing the Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai that in the event it intends to make any ad hoc appointment to Class 'D' posts, the Petitioners may be considered for appointment. The said consideration would undoubtedly be, on the basis that there is no existing right in the Petitioners for such consideration.

¶20

With the directions as aforestated, the Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶21

[K. K. SONAWANE, J.] [R. M. SAVANT, J.]

¶22

Digitally signed Arjun by Arjun Machhindra Machhindra Kadam Kadam Date: 2018.09.14 16:26:27 +0530

¶23

2/2

Ganesh Pandurang Tandel and 243 Ors. v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganesh Pandurang Tandel and 243 Ors. v. the Municipal Corporation for Greater Mumbai and 3 Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The Joint Director (Treausuries) Vs Mrs. Suvarna Umesh Sant and Ors.

Kalpana Springwala Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mrs. Savita Ashok Pethe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Vijay Rajendra Thakur Vs Smt. Babita G. Giri, Vice Chairman, Scheduled Tribe Certificate, Scrutiny Committe and Ors.

Upendra K. Kudva Vs Mumbai Municipal Corporation and 3 Others

Meeta Vasudeo Nene Vs the State of Maharashtra and 3 Ors.