Allowed

Niraj Vivekchand Yambal and Another v. Union of India and Others

Bombay HC22 Aug 2019WP/10418/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Bombay allowed the writ petition, setting aside the cancellation of the petitioners' examination. It directed the respondents to verify the petitioners' records for irregularities. If clear, the petitioners' selection was restored, and other related petitioners were also directed to be restored with 50% backwages upon similar verification.

What did the court decide?

The Writ Petition allowed; cancellation of examination order set aside for petitioners; respondents to verify records and restore selection with 50% backwages if no irregularities found within two mon

Niraj Vivekchand Yambal and Another Vs Union of… — Writ and Judicial Review | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1 935-WP-10418-19

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.10418 OF 2019

¶4

NIRAJ VIVEKCHAND YAMBAL AND ANOTHER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

¶5

Advocate for Petitioners : Dr. Swapnil D. Tawshikar ASG for Respondents : Mr. S. S. Deve AGP for Respondent-State : Mrs. A. V. Gondhalekar

¶6

CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & K. K. SONAWANE, JJ

¶7

DATED : 22^nd AUGUST, 2019.

¶8

ORDER :-

¶9

Learned counsel for the petitioners and the respondents are at ad-idem that the petitioners are similarly situated as like petitioners in Writ Petition No. 12117 of 2016 with other connected Writ Petitions, decided under Order dated 03-05-2019.

¶10

In light of that, we adopt same course and pass following order -

¶11

(i) The Writ Petition is allowed. The order of cancellation of the entire examination is set aside to the extent of the petitioners herein.

¶12

(ii) The respondents are directed to verify again, whether there are any suspicious circumstances and irregularities in case of the petitioners herein and if no such suspicious circumstances, irregularities or malpractices are found as discussed in the judgment, the selection of the petitioners be restored and further process shall be completed within a period of two months.

¶13

2 935-WP-10418-19

¶14

(iii) As far as the petitioners in Writ Petition No. 9910 of 2017 are concerned, the respondents shall verify their record as well and if no suspicions circumstances or malpractices as discussed in the judgment are noted in their individual cases, their appointments shall be restored within a period of two months with 50% backwages.

¶15

(iv) We anticipate the request for stay of this order. Since we are granting time of two months for verification and giving effect to this order, no separate time is required to be given for obtaining stay order from the superior Court.

¶16

(v) Rule is made absolute in the above terms with no order as to costs.

¶17

[ K. K. SONAWANE ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA ] JUDGE JUDGE

¶18

rrd

Niraj Vivekchand Yambal and Another v. Union of India and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Niraj Vivekchand Yambal and Another v. Union of India and 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

Vikrant Dilip More Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sainath Traderws and Anr. Vs Commissioner of Food and Drug Admistration and Food Authority

Jayabai Narayan Randive Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Gulam Dastagir Azizmiya Deshmukh and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sandeep Shivram Chavan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Shantaram Pralhadrao Nalgire Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others