Dismissed

Sayamsashan Bahuudeshiya Mahila Vikas Sanstha, Dhanora, Thr. Treasurer, Madhav v. Ingole v State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Women and Child Development, Mumbai and Others

Bombay HC26 Sept 2024WP/4861/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an NGO appointed as implementing agency for the One Stop Crises Centre at Washim under a contract without stated duration, challenged the State communication ending its role after a change of policy. The Court held the appointment was purely contractual, creating no right to continuance, and dismissed the petition, leaving it free to pursue remedies for breach of contract.

What the court decided

AI extract

Sayamsashan Bahuudeshiya Mahila Vikas… — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:10760-DB

¶2

1 17 wp 4861-2023

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.4861/2023

¶5

Sayamsashan Bahuudeshiya Mahila Vikas Sanstha, Dhanora, Thr. Treasurer, Madhav V. Ingole Vs. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. Of Women And Child Development, Mumbai And Others

¶6

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶7

- - - - Shri S.D. Chande, Advocate for petitioner Shri M.J. Khan, AGP for respondent Nos.1 to 3

¶8

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.. DATED : 26/09/2024

¶9

Heard Mr. Chande, learned Counsel for petitioner, and Mr. M.J. Khan, AGP for respondents.

¶10

It is contended that in pursuance to the Government Resolution dated 23.03.2018 (page 24), the scheme under the name “One Stop Crises Center” was brought into effect in respect of women and children, who have suffered from domestic violence and atrocities of such nature. Under the said Scheme, the petitioner came to be appointed as an Implementing Agency for Washim, under the contract dated 07.03.2022 (page 56). What is necessary to note is that, the contract does not indicate any time period, however, though it is contended by Mr. Chande, learned Counsel for the petitioner, that Government Resolution indicates that the contract would be for a period of 3 years, upon being asked to point out the relevant clause in the contract, he said that there is no such clause in contract. The Scheme of ‘One Stop Crises

¶11

2 17 wp 4861-2023

¶12

Center’, which was floated by the Central Government, however on account of the change of policy, which is reflected from the Government Resolution dated 12.05.2023, the work of implementation of the policy has been handed over on the State Level to the Commissioner, Women and Child Development, Pune, and on the District Level to the concerned District Women and Child Development Officer. It also indicates that for the Scheme of ‘One Stop Crises Center’, there are no posts created nor would be created and such appointments will have to be on contractual basis. In that view of the matter, since the appointment of the petitioner is purely contractual in nature, that does not create any right in the petitioner to claim continuance, moresover, when the agreement dated 10.03.2022 (page 56), does not indicate the time period for such appointment. In case, the petitioner is aggrieved by such breach of contract, which according to him, has occurred on account of the impugned communication dated 18.07.2023, the petitioner would be free to take recourse to whatever remedy available for breach of contract.

¶13

We do not see any reason to interfere in the impugned communication. The petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶14

( SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) ( AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

¶15

R.S. Sahare

Sayamsashan Bahuudeshiya Mahila Vikas Sanstha, Dhanora, Thr. Treasurer, Madhav v. Ingole v State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Women and Child Development, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Sayamsashan Bahuudeshiya Mahila Vikas Sanstha, Dhanora, Thr. Treasurer, Madhav v. Ingole v State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Women and Child Development, Mumbai and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Baban S/O Ramdasji Kamble Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Ministry of Agri., Animal Husbandry Dairy Devpt. and Fishery and Ors.

Nalanda Ramdasji Raut Vs Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Others

Bhandara District Labour Co-Op. Society Limited Federation, Bhandara Thr. Chairman, B. S. Khandait Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Public Work Dept., Mumbai and Others

M/S. Skf India Ltd. Mumbai through Reni Varghese Vs Western Coal Field, Nagpur through General Manager and Another

Smt. Pushpabai Sambhaji Kamble and Another Vs the Chief Officer, Municipal Council, Pusad, Yavatmal and Others

Kishor S/O Rajeshwar Sonkusare Vs the S.T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Thr. Member Secretary, Gadchiroli and Others