Ramesh Gopalrao Dhutade And ORS v. The State Of Mah And ORS
1 W.P.No.853/06
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE
AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD.
WRIT PETITION NO.853 OF 2006 Ramesh Gopalrao Dhutade and others.
... Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and others.
... Respondents.
...
Mr.U.R.Awate, advocate holding for Mr.S.B.Talekar, advocate for the petitioners. Mr.D.R.Kale, A.G.P. for the State.
...
CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND MANGESH S. PATIL,JJ.
Date : 22.08.2017.
PER COURT :
1.
The petitioner assails the order passed by the Tribunal, directing to consider the original applicants from the quota of 60% meant for graduate.
2.
Mr.Awate, learned counsel submits that
2 W.P.No.853/06 the petitioner was not made party before the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal affects the rights of the petitioner. The petitioner was possessing graduate qualification prior to his appointment. Because of the order of the Tribunal even those candidate who were not possessing graduate qualification at the time of their appointment and possessed graduate qualification at the time of promotion would be considered along with the petitioner. The same is illegal and is not countenance by law. The date of acquiring qualification ought to be considered as the date for the purpose of determining the seniority.
3.
The learned A.G.P. supports the order.
4.
There is no rule suggesting computation of seniority from the date of acquiring qualification. In absence of any rule, the length of service coupled with fitness will have to be considered.
5.
The notification dated 19.8.2004, more
3 W.P.No.853/06 particularly, Rule 3(a) thereto reads as under : " Appointment to the posts of Agriculture Supervisor/Laboratory Inspector/Computer (Statistical Branch) in Group 'C' in the Commissionerate, shall be made either (a) by promotion of a suitable person, on the basis of seniority subject to fitness from amongst the persons holding the posts of Agriculture Assistant/Laboratory Assistant, Group 'C' having not less than three years regular service in that post;
Provided that, the ratio for promotion amongst the persons who possess a degree and who do not possess a degree diploma shall be 60 : 40 of the vacancies available for promotion or (b) ......
4 W.P.No.853/06 (c) ......"
6.
The criteria is subject to fitness. As the subject is not covered by rule, the seniority amongst the persons holding the similar post in the same cadre has to be determined on the basis of length of service, of-course, subject to fitness. Reference can be had to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of "M.B.Joshi and others Vs.Satish Kumar Pandey and others" reported in AIR 1993 Supreme Court 267 and in the case of "Pramod K.Pankaj Vs. State of Bihar and others" reported in AIR 2004 Supreme Court 746. 7.
In light of the above, no error has been committed by the Tribunal. The Writ Petition is dismissed. Rule discharged. No costs.
(MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp853.06
5 W.P.No.853/06
6 W.P.No.853/06