Disposed

Bharat Tukaram Kavade and Others v. the Chief Officer and Another

Bombay HC16 Feb 2023WP/3975/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of two writ petitions where petitioners sought permission to work on sanctioned posts. Due to a settled consensus among parties, specific petitioners were permitted to continue work until regular appointments are finalized, while others whose claims were premature were dismissed.

What did the court decide?

Petitioners permitted to continue work pending regular appointment; others dismissed; Municipal Council retains right to take action under law.

Bharat Tukaram Kavade and Others Vs the Chief Officer… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 wp 3978.22

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 3978 OF 2022

¶4

Mangesh Dattatraya Joshi and others .. Petitioners Versus The Chief Officer and another .. Respondents

¶5

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3975 OF 2022

¶6

Bharat Tukaram Kavade and others .. Petitioners Versus The Chief Officer and another .. Respondents

¶7

Shri Manoj D. Shinde, Advocate for the Petitioners in both matters.

¶8

Shri S. P. Bhrame, Advocate h/f Shri Shrikant D. Madde, Advocate for the Respondent No. 1 in both matters. Shri S. N. Morampalle, A.G.P. for the Respondent No. 2 in both matters.

¶9

CORAM : SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J. DATE : 16TH FEBRUARY, 2023.

¶10

FINAL ORDER :

¶11

. Writ petitions can be disposed of in view of consensus which is arrived at between the parties that the petitioner No. 1 in Writ Petition No. 3975 of 2022 is permitted to continue to work with the respondent No. 1 and petitioner Nos. 3 and 5 in Writ Petition No. 3978 of 2022 are permitted to continued to work with the respondent No. 1 and as such would be continued till the process of regular appointment on the sanctioned posts is concluded by the Municipal Council. Petitioner No. 1 in Writ

¶12

2 wp 3978.22

¶13

Petition No. 3975 of 2022 and petitioner Nos. 3 and 5 in Writ Petition No. 3978 of 2022 will not claim any equity on the basis of that they are permitted to work.

¶14

As far as other petitioners are concerned, they have not reported to work. The claim raised by them stands dismissed.

¶15

During the employment of petitioner No. 1 in Writ Petition No. 3975 of 2022 and petitioner Nos. 3 and 5 in Writ Petition No. 3978 of 2022, in the event there is any cause to take action by the Municipal Council, the Municipal Council is free to take action in accordance with law.

¶16

Writ petitions stand disposed of in view of the above.

¶17

Needless to state that the petitioners are permitted to participate in the selection process.

¶18

[SHARMILA U. DESHMUKH, J.]

¶19

bsb/Feb. 23

Bharat Tukaram Kavade and Others v. the Chief Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Tukaram Kavade and Others v. the Chief Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shaikh Hamid Shaikh Biban and Others Vs Shaikh Meer Shaikh Nasib Deceased through Lrs Bibibegam Shiakh Mir and Others

Yogesh Ambadasrao Deshmukh Vs Chitra Yogesh Deshmukh

Prakash Govindrao Amrutwar Vs Laxman Govind Amrutwar through Gpa Holder Govind Vasantrao Amrutwar and Others

Shantabai Marotrao Nalge and Others Vs Bhagyashree Satyanarayan Nalge and Others

Shivram Honaji Gudame Since Deceased through Lrs Venkat Shivram Gudame Vs the State of Maharashtra through Collector and Another

Mangesh Dattatraya Joshi and Others Vs the Chief Officer and Another