Disposed

Classo George Fernandes v. State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC17 Oct 2018WP/3339/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner posted as Assistant Fire Officer challenged his ineligibility declaration for Chief Fire Officer. The Court noted that the Corporation did not proceed to fill the post. It disposed of the petition deferring the ineligibility issue to a future occasion, as the post was not being filled.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed of; issue regarding ineligibility declaration kept open for future challenge.

Classo George Fernandes Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(38) wp-3339.14.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.3339 OF 2014

¶4

Classo George Fernandes : Petitioner. Versus State of Maharashtra Through Secretary Urban Development Department & ors. : Respondents.

¶5

Mrs. Neeta Karnik for the Petitioner. Mr. A I Patel, Addl. GP for the Respondent/State. Mr. N R Bubna for the Respondent Nos.2 and 3.

¶6

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ. DATE : 17^th OCTOBER 2018

¶7

P.C.

¶8

1 The Petitioner was earlier working with the Respondent No.2 – Corporation as the Assistant Fire Officer. The Petitioner was given the charge of the Chief Fire Officer. At the same contemporaneous time it seems that the Respondent No.2 – Corporation issued an advertisement for filling up the post of Chief Fire Officer by nomination. The Petitioner resigned from the services of the Respondent No.2 – Corporation and applied for the said post of Chief Fire Officer. The Petitioner was one amongst five Applicants. Out of the said Applicants, four including the Petitioner have been held to be ineligible for the said post as can be seen from the office note which is annexed as Exhibit AQ at page 103 of the above Writ Petition. It seems that after issuing the advertisement and considering the eligibility, the Respondent No.2 – Corporation has not proceeded to fill up the said post. The Petitioner takes

¶9

1 of 2

¶10

lgc

¶11

(38) wp-3339.14.doc

¶12

exception to the factum of he being declared as ineligible. In view of the fact that the Respondent No.2 – Corporation has not decided to fill up the said post on the basis of the advertisement which was issued in the year 2013, it is not necessary for us in in the instant Writ petition to go into the aspect of the challenge to the declaration of ineligibility of the Petitioner. By keeping the said issue open for being agitated at an appropriate time, if the occasion so arises in future, we dispose of the above Writ Petition.

¶13

[NITIN W. SAMBRE, J] [R. M. SAVANT, J]

¶14

2 of 2

¶15

lgc

Classo George Fernandes v. State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Classo George Fernandes v. State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Urban Development Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shri Murlidhar Sitaram Khairmode and Ors. Vs the Secretary, Planning Dept. and Ors.

Kishor Digambar Gaikwad and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra through the Secretary and Ors.

Bapu Devram Aher Vs the State of Maharashtra Thru the Secretary, Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

The Indian Coffee Workers' Co-Op. Society Ltd. Vs the Secretary, Industries Energy and Labour Dpt. and Anr.

M/S Esquire Express and Courier Service and 2 Ors. Vs Union of India and 4 Ors.

Ranjana Prakash Shinde and Ors. Vs M/S Spire Grace Ventures through Its Partner, Shaikh Mehmood