Nirmala A. Rupawate v. The Union Of India And 2 ORS.

Urmila Ingale

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3753 OF 2017 Smt.Maygirl Gracelin Alice and ors.

.. Petitioners Vs.

The Union of India and ors.

.. Respondents ALONG WITH WRIT PETITION (L) NO. 3754 OF 2017 Smt.Nirmala A. Rupawate .. Petitioner Vs.

The Union of India and ors.

.. Respondents Mr.A.S.Rao a/w Mr.S.P. Saxena, for the Petitioners. Mr..AM. Sethna a.w Mr.D.P. Singh, for Respondents. CORAM : SMT. V.K.TAHILRAMANI ACTING C.J.

AND M.S.KARNIK, J.

DATE : 10th JANUARY, 2018 ORDER (PER M.S.KARNIK, J.) :

1.

Pursuant to the recommendations made by the Selection Committee, the Competent Authority approved the selected panel of promotion including the petitioners recommended by the committee whereupon the petitioners 1/3

assumed the charge of sister in-charge (functional post) with effect from 12/11/2015. They started discharging duties of the promotional post. By letter dated 18/07/2016 the respondents scrapped the select panel dated 31/03/2015 as a result of which the petitioners are reverted. The respondents revised norms/eligibility for promotion to sister-in-charge. 2.

The petitioners filed OA No. 268/2017 challenging the reversion and the OA is pending before the Tribunal. During the pendency of the OA, the respondents issued interview call letters and even the petitioners were called for interview on 28/12/2017. The petitioners filed Misc. Application before the Tribunal for staying of the interview. It is the grievance of the petitioners that the Tribunal did not pass any order in respect of interim prayer made by the petitioners.

3.

Learned Counsel for the respondents, on instructions, submitted that in connected matter, OA is pending before the Tribunal, the Tribunal has already passed an order 2/3

that the selection process may continue but no appointments should be made without the leave of the Court. Learned Counsel for the respondents, on instructions, fairly submits that this order will cover the case of the petitioners also. 4.

In the light of the stand taken by the learned Counsel for the respondents, following order would meet the ends of the justice.

O R D E R

i) The selection process under challenge before the Tribunal may continue, however, no appointments be made without the leave of the Tribunal or till the disposal of the Misc. Application.

ii) The Tribunal may endeavour to dispose of the Misc. Application as expeditiously as possible.

5.

Writ Petitions are disposed of in the above terms with no order as to costs.

(M.S.KARNIK, J.) (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) 3/3