Adhal Pandurang Soma and 60 Ors. v. the Municipal Commissioner
Case brief
What is this about?
Petitioners seeking appointment in labour posts based on 2009 selection and wait list status were dismissed. The Court held the 2009 selection process was superseded by later fresh recruits, the wait list validity expired, and no vested right to appointment existed for those with full marks.
What the court decided
17.592.19-wp+.docx
DigitallyDigitally signed bysigned by BASAVRAJBASAVRAJ BASAVRAJBASAVRAJ GURAPPAGURAPPA GURAPPAGURAPPA PATILPATIL PATILPATIL Date:Date: 2023.02.032023.02.06 18:16:4910:42:39 +0530+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 592 OF 2019
Vishal Kashinath Mestri & Ors.
….. Petitioners
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
….. Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 2948 OF 2019 WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.284 OF 2019
IN
Issues for consideration
3 issues framed by the court
Whether service candidates in the merit-cum-wait list from the 2009 labour recruitment process have a vested right to appointment considering subsequent fresh recruitment drives and expired validity o
Whether the Corporation can be directed to depoly több than advertised posts based on a select list from an earlier advertisement.
Whether an opportunity of hearing is required when petitioners have no vested right to appointment.
Parties & counsel
- petitioner
Vishal Kashinath Mestri and others
- petitioner
Adhal Pandurang Soma and others
- respondent
The State of Maharashtra and others
- respondent
The Municipal Commissioner Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and others
Coram
Case details
As recorded by the court registry
Similar cases
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
Sujata Janardan Paparkar and Anr. Vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and 6 Ors.
Shankar Laxman Pingale Vs State of Maha. Thr. Minister for Marketing and Ors.
Sanjay Narayan Pansare Vs State of Maha. Thr. Minister for Marketing and Ors.
Vishal Kashinath Mestri and 409 Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and 10 Ors.