Allowed

Satish Uttamrao Rathod and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Bombay HC20 Jan 2023CA/749/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court dismissed a civil application due to default but restored the underlying writ petition on delaying parties filing a comprehensive representation to the competent authority regarding teacher appointments and salary arrears within three months.

What did the court decide?

Competent authority to consider petitioners' representation on Government Resolutions regarding appointments and salary within three months.

Satish Uttamrao Rathod and Others Vs the State of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

952 CIVIL APPLICATION NO.749 OF 2023

¶4

IN WP/5269/2022

¶5

SATISH UTTAMRAO RATHOD AND OTHERS
VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND
OTHERS

¶7

Mr.N.P.Patil Jamalpurkar, Advocate for the applicant.
Mr.S.G.Karlekar, AGP for the respondent/State.

¶8

DATE : JANUARY 20, 2023

¶9

PER COURT:

¶10

1.The petition is dismissed on account of default. Delay of 95 days
is caused in filing this civil application.

¶11

2. Heard the learned Advocates for the respective sides. For the reasons cited, this civil application is allowed. Delay is condoned.

¶12

3.Since the learned Advocate for the petitioner submits on
instructions that this petition can be disposed off in terms of the order
dated 10.01.2023, passed in WP No.6729/2022, considering the

¶13

khs/Jan.2023/749

¶14

- 2 -

¶15

submissions of the learned AGP, the writ petition stands restored and is
disposed off by passing the same order as under :-

¶16

"1 . The petitioners have put forth prayer clauses B and C,

¶17

which read as under :-

¶18

“B) The respondent nos.2 & 3 may please be directed to forthwith grant approval to the appointments of the petitioners no.1 & 2 as Higher Secondary Teachers from the date of their initial appointments i.e. 20.06.2013, by issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of writ of mandamus.

¶19

C) The respondents no.1 to 4 may please be directed to forthwith sanction, release & pay the arrears of salary in favour of the petitioners no.1 and 2 from the date of their initial appointments i.e. 20.06.2013 and further pay them monthly regular salary henceforth, by issuing writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions in the nature of writ of mandamus"

¶20

2. Across the Bar, the learned advocate for the petitioners submits, on instructions, that they would not press for a direction of this Court to grant approvals. They would only pray that the proposals with regard to these petitioners may be considered for approval by the competent authority in the light of the Government Resolutions dated 21.01.2013, 08.03.2019 and 23.03.2022.

¶21

3. The learned advocate for the petitioners further submits that the petitioners desire to make a comprehensive representation to the competent authority.

¶22

4. The learned AGP submits that it is for the competent

¶23

khs/Jan.2023/749

¶24

authority to look into as to which Government Resolution would be applicable. As the petitioners have cited three Government Resolutions, the competent authority would consider the issue in the light of all such Government Resolutions as would be applicable to the cases of the petitioners.

¶25

5. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed off with the direction that if comprehensive representations are tendered by the petitioners to the competent authority, it would be the competent authority, vested with the jurisdiction by law, which would consider the said representations in the light of all such Government Resolutions as are applicable, within a period of THREE MONTHS from the date of receipt of such representations."

¶26

 ( SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J. ) ( RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)

¶27

khs/Jan.2023/749

Satish Uttamrao Rathod and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Satish Uttamrao Rathod and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suresh Dalsing Pawar Vs Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University and Others

Baban Dajiba Zote Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Rahul Shailesh Shinde U/G Father Shailesh Shamrao Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Another

Dnyaneshwar Kishan Wagh and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Meer Nawid Ali Meer Basharat Ali Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others

Swati Annasaheb Kadu Throgh Its Lrs Milind Ramchandra Jagtap Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Others