Disposed

Rajendra Padmakar Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC11 Feb 2019WP/1898/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This was an admission stage oral order in a writ petition concerning service grievances regarding promoted avenues for Ashram School employees. The Court directed the Respondent Commissioner to decide a pending representation expeditiously within 12 weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directions issued to Respondent No. 2 to decide the representation dated 22nd September 2017 as early as possible, not later than twelve weeks from the date of the order.

Rajendra Padmakar Kamble and Others Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

1898.19wp

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1898 OF 2019

¶5

1.	Rajendra Padmakar Kamble, Age: 43 years, Occu: Service, R/o Government Ashram School, Tisgaon, Tq. Khultabad, Dist. Aurangabad
2.	Smt. Jayshree Koutikrao Narwade, AGe: 41 years, Occu: Service, R/o Government Ashram School, Hutti, Tq. Sillod, Dist. Aurangabad
3.	Shaskiya Adiwasi Ashramshala Adhikshak Sanghatana, Through its President Shri. Raju Ninaji Sardar, Age: 50 years, Occu: Service, Office at 32, Samrudhi Vihar Apartment, Laxmi Oil Mill Compound, Akola	..PETITIONERS
	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through Chief Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai
2.	The Commissioner, Tribal Development, State of Maharashtra, Nashik	..RESPONDENTS
Mr S.	V. Natu, Advocate for petitioners;
Mr A.	R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondents

¶6

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND

¶7

S. M. GAVHANE, JJ.

¶8

DATE : 11th February, 2019

(2)

1898.19wp

ORAL ORDER:

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, on instructions, submitted before us that though the petitioners have made prayers (B) and (C) as basic prayers and prayer clause (D) as an interim measure, they be permitted to add prayer clause (D-1) whereby they would seek the directions to decide the representation submitted to respondent No.2 - Commissioner, Tribal Development, State of Maharashtra, Nashik.

¶13

Learned Counsel for the petitioners then invited our attention to the copy of the representation dated 22nd September, 2017 placed on record at Exh.'D' to submit that the petitioners and alike Superintendents are working in Ashram School for a considerable long period. It is submitted that initially, the State government framed a policy under the Notification/Circular dated 7th January, 2004 and it was stated in the said Circular that the promotional avenue would be open in 75:25, but subsequently there was change in the policy and then this percentage was reversed i.e. 25:75. It is further submitted that by reversal of this position, the petitioners and the similarly situated employees may be deprived of the promotional avenue. There are other grievances also which are referred to in the representation. Learned Counsel for the petitioners then submits that the representation is pending before the authority for a long period, as such, the petitioners pray for directions to respondent No.2 to decide the same expeditiously.

¶14

1898.19wp

¶15

(3)

¶16

This being only prayer pressed in service, the petition is disposed of at the admission stage with directions to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 22nd September, 2017 as early as possible and not later than twelve weeks from the date of the order of this Court, needless to state on its merits. We further make it clear that, if the Commissioner is of the opinion to grant opportunity of hearing to the association, on whose behalf the representation is submitted, he may grant such opportunity of hearing to the in all representative of the association.

¶17

With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

¶18

(S. M. GAVHANE, J.)

¶19

(PRASANNA B. VARALE, J.)

¶20

sjk

Rajendra Padmakar Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendra Padmakar Kamble and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Poornawadi Nagrik Sahakari Bank Ltd. Beed through Authorized Officer Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Kamalkishor Motiram Dhage Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sanjay Kachru Pawar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shivaji Saheba Waghmare Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Santoshi Hanumant Sarje Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akash Shravan Narsinge Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others