Shri Lokesh Laxman Shinde And ORS. v. The Managing Director Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd. And ORS.

901. WP 6850.16.doc JPP

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 6850 OF 2016 Mr. Lokesh Laxman Shinde and Ors.

... Petitioners.

V/s.

The Managing Director Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Co. Ltd.

and Ors.

... Respondents.

Mr. Anilkumar Patil a/w. Mithun Mahajan for the Petitioners. Mr. Abhijeet A. Joshi for Respondents 1 to 5. Mr. B.V. Samant, AGP for the State.

CORAM : S.C. Dharmadhikari and Smt. Bharati H. Dangre, JJ.

2 November, 2017.

P.C. :- This Petition was argued at length yesterday i.e. on 1 November 2017 and it was posted today for dictation of judgment in Court.

2.

Yesterday, Mr. Joshi appearing on behalf of contesting Respondents had sought time to take instructions particularly on the point as to whether the Petitioners can be considered for promotion on par with other candidates. The tentative instructions to Mr. Joshi yesterday were that barring Petitioner No.5, the case of Petitioner

901. WP 6850.16.doc Nos. 1 to 4 was considered for promotion and they have indeed been promoted. However, Mr. Joshi sought time to take complete instructions and that is how the matter was posted today. 3.

Today, Mr. Joshi informs that all the five Petitioners before us would be duly considered for promotion, if not already considered, and if some of them have already been promoted, they would be assigned a deemed date of promotion on par with the other candidates who are similarly placed as per impugned Selection List. 4.

Mr. Joshi, on instructions from the concerned official present in Court, makes a further statement that all these cases would be placed before the competent Selection Committee for passing the requisite and necessary formal orders and directions. However, his instructions are firm and that each of the Petitioner would be granted the benefit on par with similarly situated candidates and some of whom have already derived the benefit of promotion as per impugned Selection List.

5.

Once these statements are made on instructions, we do not think any grievance of the Petitioners survives for consideration. The Petition is disposed of by accepting the statements made on instructions as an undertaking given to this Court. (Smt. Bharati H. Dangre, J.) (S.C. Dharmadhikari, J.)