Disposed

Kiran S/O Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors. v. the Union of India Throu.Its Sec. Dept of Justice Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

Bombay HC27 Nov 2024WP/13053/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

System Officers and Senior System Officers appointed on contract under the e-Courts Project sought absorption, regularization and protection from termination. The Court granted ad-interim relief restraining respondents from terminating their services or replacing them with other ad hoc employees, and directed reply affidavits within four weeks, re-notifying the matter to 21 October 2024.

What did the court decide?

Ad-interim injunction: respondents not to terminate petitioners' services or replace them with ad hoc employees; notice issued; replies within four weeks.

Kiran S/O Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors. vs the Union of… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

Digitally signed by RUSHIKESH RUSHIKESH VISHNU VISHNU PATIL PATIL Date: 2024.09.20 17:30:22 +0530

¶2

1/4 907 WP.13053.2024.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 13053 OF 2024

¶5

Kiran S/o Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors.

¶6

.. Petitioners

¶7

Versus

¶8

The Union of India, Through its Secretary, Department of Justice, Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

¶9

.. Respondents

¶10

WITH

¶11

WRIT PETITION NO. 9340 OF 2024

¶12

Kore Ganesh Baban and Ors. .. Petitioners

¶13

Versus

¶14

The Union of India, Through its Secretary (Expenditure) Ministry of Finance, New Delhi-01 and Ors. .. Respondents

¶15

Mr. S. B. Talekar, for the Petitioner in WP/13053/2024.

¶16

Mr. Rajendra Raghuwanshi a/w Ms Kainat Jalil Rakhangi, for the Petitioners in WP/9340/2024.

¶17

Mr. S. R. Nargolkar a/w Ms Neeta Patil, for Respondent Nos.4 and 5 in WP/13053/2024 and for Respondent No.4 in WP/9340/2024.

¶18

CORAM: BHARATI DANGRE & MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

¶19

DATED : 19 SEPTEMBER, 2024

¶20

P.C:-

¶21

The two Writ Petitions are fled by the individuals, who

¶22

are working either as Senior System Offcers or System Offcers in District and Taluka Courts in the State of

¶23

R.V.Patil

¶24

2/4 907 WP.13053.2024.odt

¶25

Maharashtra, under the e-Courts Project on contract basis, and the Petitions primarily seek their absorption and regularization, on the establishment of the High Court or the District Courts, as the case may be, by issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate relief, direction or order, as the case may be.

¶26

By way of an interim order, an injunction is sought against the respondents, their agents and subordinates from terminating their services by appointing another set of ad hoc employees, pending the hearing and fnal disposal of the Writ Petitions.

¶27

We have heard learned counsel Mr. Talekar for the petitioners in Writ Petition No.13053 of 2024 fled by 27 System Offcers working in various Taluka Courts and even District Courts in different districts.

¶28

As far as Writ Petition No. 9340 of 2024 is concerned, Mr. Raghuwanshi, represent 61 System Offcers, who are similarly situated and seeking almost similar relief in the other Petition.

¶29

Today, we have recorded the presence of the Registrar General, High Court of Bombay, Respondent No. 4 in Writ Petition No. 13053 of 2024, who is represented by learned counsel, Mr. Nargolkar, who seek some time to fle the affdavit in reply.

¶30

The learned counsel has placed before us the note submitted before the Administrative Committee of the High Court, headed by the Hon’ble the Chief Justice, in relation to the representation preferred by Senior System Offcers and

¶31

R.V.Patil

¶32

3/4 907 WP.13053.2024.odt

¶33

System Offcers working in the District and Taluka Courts in the State of Maharashtra, under the e-Courts Project on the contract basis, seeking their absorption and regularization and for extension of benefts available to the regular employees, such as annual increments, leave, dearness allowance etc. with retrospective effect.

¶34

Reading of the said note would disclose that, pursuant to the issuance of a Government Resolution sanctioning demands for technical manpower under the 14^th Finance Commission for the post of Senior System Offcers and System Offcers, a recruitment process was undertaken for 199 technical posts, which included 40 posts of Senior System Offcers and 159 posts of System Offcers on contract basis in the year 2019, and on completion of the recruitment process appointment orders were issued to the eligible Senior System Offcers and System Offcers for 12 months on contract basis at the respective District and Taluka Courts in State of Maharashtra. Pursuant to the directions of the CMIT Committee, reappointment orders were issued for further period of 12 months, considering their performance report received from the head of the concerned District Courts.

¶35

Some of the Senior System Offcers and System Offcers, in the meantime, submitted their resignation and some were terminated, however, it is not in dispute that all the petitioners before us continued to hold the said post, though in respect of some of these offcers, their tenure has come to an end on 15^th September 2024.

¶36

16^th and 17^th September 2024 being holidays, the Writ Petitions were mentioned before us on 18^th September 2024,

¶37

R.V.Patil

¶38

4/4 907 WP.13053.2024.odt

¶39

and we have granted circulation for today.

¶40

There can be no doubt about the fact that the services of these persons are very much required for continuing with the system, as the e-Committee of the Supreme Court had requested all the High Courts to create permanent technical manpower funded by the respective State Governments, as this manpower was very much necessary to support for ICT Enabled Courts and to create a sustainable mechanism for continuous smooth operation of the ICT System in the Courts.

¶41

Undisputedly, the petitioners before us are the professional technical support staff, which has been rendering services on their appointment through a regular recruitment process though on contract basis, but since at present their apprehension is that, they may be substituted by another set of ad hoc employees, awaiting the response from Respondent No. 4 as well as the response from the State Government, we deem it appropriate to grant ad-interim relief, in Writ Petition No.13053 of 2024 and Writ Petition No. 9340 of 2024, thereby directing the respondents not to terminate the services of the petitioners in both the aforesaid Petitions and replace them by another set of ad hoc employees.

¶42

Issue notice to the Respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. Nargolkar waive notice for the Respondent Nos. 4 and 5.

¶43

Let the Respondent – Authorities fle their reply affdavit within a period of four weeks from today.

¶44

Re-notify to 21^st October 2024.

¶45

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (BHARATI DANGRE, J.)

¶46

R.V.Patil

Kiran S/O Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors. v. the Union of India Throu.Its Sec. Dept of Justice Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kiran S/O Keshavrao Lahurikar and Ors. v. the Union of India Throu.Its Sec. Dept of Justice Ministry of Law and Justice and Ors.

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

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rampal Shivmurat Yadav vs Slum Rehabilitation Authority (Sra)

Jagdish Madhavdas Mulchandani vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary

Ravindra Mahadev Sakre and Ors. vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority (Mhada) and Ors.

K S Chamankar Enterprise vs Shiv Infra Vision Pvt. Ltd.

Nurani Krishnaswamy Sundaram vs Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai

Goregaon Siddharth Nagar Sahakari Griha Nirman Sanstha Limited vs Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Authority and Anr.