Satish Nanaji Gavali v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another
1 909-571-2022wp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 909 WRIT PETITION NO.571 OF 2022 SUHAS DHARAMSING VASAVE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Mr T.M. Venjane, Advocate for petitioners Mr A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondent no.1 - AND - 910 WRIT PETITION NO.572 OF 2022 ARJUN GUNJARYA PAWARA
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Mr T.M. Venjane, Advocate for petitioners Mr A.R. Kale, A.G.P. for respondent no.1 - AND - 911 WRIT PETITION NO.573 OF 2022 SATISH NANAJI GAVALI
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Mr T.M. Venjane, Advocate for petitioners Mr P.S. Patil, Addl.G.P. for respondent no.1 - AND - 912 WRIT PETITION NO.599 OF 2022 RAHUL DATTARAO THOMBARE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER Mr T.M. Venjane, Advocate for petitioners Mr S.P. Tiwari, A.G.P. for respondent no.1
2 909-571-2022wp CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA, SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.
DATE : 19th January, 2022 PER COURT :
1.
The learned A.G.P. raised objection that the petitioners have remedy before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. 2.
Mr Venjane, learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that on 24.12.2021, directions are given to appoint the candidates, however, names of the petitioners do not appear.
3.
We asked the learned Counsel for the petitioners whether the names of those candidates whose claims are invalidated are also recommended. The learned Counsel for petitioners, on instructions submits that the persons whose claims are invalidated are not recommended in the select list. The petitioners would, therefore, contend on the merit of the select list or otherwise. 4.
In view of aforesaid, it would be appropriate if the Tribunal considers the said aspect.
5.
In light of that, we dispose of the petitions with liberty to the petitioners to avail the alternate remedy. In that event, all contentions kept open.
6.
Writ Petitions disposed of. No costs.
( SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) vvr