Bombay High CourtWP/1766/2015disposed offdismissed for default

Harshvardhan Ashok Bhalerao And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

2015-08-13Hon'Ble Shri Justice S V Gangapurwala,Hon'Ble Shri Justice V.K. Jadhav2 pages

1 wp 1766.15

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 1766 OF 2015 Harshvardhan Ashok Bhalerao and others .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri V. D. Hon, Advocate i/by Shri A. V. Hon, Advocate for Petitioners.

Shri S. G. Sangle, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2. Shri V. B. Anjanwatikar, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4. Shri A. G. Talhar, Advocate for the Intervenor. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND V. K. JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 13TH AUGUST, 2015.

PER COURT :

The petitioners state that, this Court in Writ Petition No. 1920 of 2014 had directed the authority to decide the proposals seeking approval to the appointments of the petitioners. This Court vide order dated 05.03.2014 in Writ Petition No. 1920 of 2014 had directed the Joint Director, Higher Education, Jalgaon Division, Jalgaon to take into consideration the objection raised by petitioners therein while passing orders of approval to the service and the fresh appointees and thereafter may pass appropriate orders in accordance with provisions of law, relevant

2 wp 1766.15 regulations and Standard Code. Instead the authority had stayed the said proposals on the ground that there is dispute. The Writ Petition No. 1920 of 2014 itself was filed objecting to the process of appointment initiated by the rival group. In the said petition this Court had passed the said order directing Joint Director to decide the proposals after hearing the parties. 02.

We have heard Mr. Hon, the learned senior counsel for petitioners, the learned Assistant Government Pleader and Mr. Talhar, the learned counsel for the intervenor. 03.

The authority is expected to decide proposals on its own merits as directed vide order dated 05.03.2014 in Writ Petition No. 1920 of 2014, instead of that keeping said proposals in abeyance.

04.

In the light of the above, the order dated 31.10.2014 is set aside and the authority shall decide the proposals submitted to it seeking approval to the appointments of petitioners as directed by this Court vide order dated 05.03.2014 in Writ Petition No. 1920 of 2014. The writ petition accordingly is disposed of. No costs.

[ V. K. JADHAV, J. ] [ S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] bsb/Aug. 15