Disposed

Premlal S/O Shrawan Donadkar v. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bramhapuri and Others

Bombay HC19 Mar 2024WP/5507/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court declared the existing selection process for a Peon post lapsed. Directing the concerned authorities to restart the selection afresh within three months, noting the petitioner was more meritorious than the previously selected candidate.

What did the court decide?

Declaration that the prior selection process is lapsed/cancelled. Directions to select afresh and complete within three months.

Premlal S/O Shrawan Donadkar Vs Block Development… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

2024:BHC-NAG:3384-DB

¶2

907-WP-5507-2018.odt 1

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.5507 of 2018

¶5

Premlal Shrawan Donadkar

¶6

vs.

¶7

Block Development Officer, Chandrapur & others

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order

¶9

Shri R.I.Alone, Advocate for petitioner. Shri A.M.Sudame, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Shri G.G.Bade, Advocate for respondent no.2. Shri Y.N.Thengre, Advocate for respondent no.3.

¶10

CORAM :- NITIN W. SAMBRE AND ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ. DATE :- 19^th MARCH, 2024.

¶11

Leave granted to implead Zilla Parishad, Chandrapur, through its Chief Executive Officer, as party respondent no.4. The amendment be carried out forthwith.

¶12

The issue pertains to the selection of respondent no.3 on the post of ‘Peon’ with respondent no.2-Gram Panchayat.

¶13

We have perused the objection raised by the respondent no.1Block Development Officer, Bramhapuri as reflected in the communication dated 20/07/2018 addressed to Sarpanch and UpaSarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Ranmochan.

¶14

Apart from above, perusal of the record depicts that the petitioner is comparatively more meritorious than the respondent no.3, still the respondent no.3 appears to have been recommended.

¶15

In view of pendency of the writ petition, the respondent no.2 has not issued any appointment order in the matter.

¶16

In the aforesaid factual matrix and having regard to the fact that the selection process was completed way back in 2018, we deem it appropriate to issue directions to the respondent nos. 1 and 4 to direct the respondent no.2 to start selection process afresh and complete the

¶17

907-WP-5507-2018.odt 2

¶18

same within a period of three months from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶19

Needless to clarify that the selection process which was already undertaken is hereby declared as lapsed/cancelled in view of the objection raised by the respondent no.1-Block Development Officer as reflected in the communication dated 20.07.2018. The petitioner as well as the respondent no. 3 are at liberty to apply pursuant to the fresh advertisement.

¶20

With these directions the writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

¶21

(ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.) (NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.)

¶22

Andurkar.

Premlal S/O Shrawan Donadkar v. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bramhapuri and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Premlal S/O Shrawan Donadkar v. Block Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti, Bramhapuri and Others

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

Similar cases

Ramkrishna Wasudeo Vikhar Vs State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Department of Education, Mumbai and Others

Maheshwari Durgaprasad Surajjoshi Vs the S.T. Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Gondia Thr. Member Secy. and Ors.

Bajaj Auto Ltd, Akurdi, Pune Thr. Its Vice President (Legal) Shri Nasir Ahmed Vs Ramdevbaba Motors, Nagpur, Thr. Its Partner Yogesh Kamalkishor Baheti, Akola and Others

Mayaram S/O. Sahajram Sadhwani Vs Municipal Council Karanja Lad, Thr. Its Chief Officer, Karanja Lad and Others

Jay Santoshi Mata Mandir, Nagpur Thr. Its Care Taker and Owner Smt. Muktabai v. Larokar Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thr. Its Secretary, Dept. of Home, Mumbai and Others

Pravin Ramlallu Tiwari(Husband) and Another vs State of Mah.T Hr. Pso Gittikhadan Nagpur Dist.Nagpur and Another