In WP No. 5244 of 2019, the petitioner sought employment. The court recorded that while Beed Zilla Parishad offered no objection, Aurangabad Zilla Parishad stated posts are unavailable and the petitioner would be considered when a post vacates. Accordingly, the writ petition was disposed of without costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 901-WP5244-19.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 5244 OF 2019
Sultana Jainoddin Shaikh
.. Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others
.. Respondents
Mr. B. S. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioner. Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondents-State. Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. Mr. S. B. Ghute, Advocate for Respondent No. 4.
CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ
DATED : 14th AUGUST, 2019.
PER COURT :-
( MANGESH S. PATIL ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE
P.S.B.
1 of 1
1 issue framed by the court
Whether to allow the petitioner to join a post given that the Aurangabad Zilla Parishad claims no posts are currently available.
Sultana Jainoddin Shaikh
The State of Maharashtra
Others
S. V. Gangapurwala
Mangesh S. Patil
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
