Ramesh Gangaram Thorat v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD (1) WP NOs.1630/2013,1629/2013 929 WRIT PETITION NO. 1630 OF 2013 WITH WP/1629/2013 VASANT DONGAR KALAL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Chaudhari S.U.

AGP for Respondent State: Mr.P.G.Borade Mr.Dheple Shantaram R., Adv., for Respondent nos. 5 and 6. Respondent no.4 is served.

...

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & P.R. BORA, JJ.

Dated: February 25, 2016 ...

PER COURT :- 1.

Heard learned Counsel appearing for the parties. Perused the pleadings in the petitions, annexures thereto, and the reply filed by respondent no.2.

2.

There is statement in the reply filed by respondent no.2 in paragraph No.7 that, after issuance of order dated 17.6.2011 by respondent no.2, and after rectifying the seniority list dated 1st January, 2006, respondent no.2 has sent a proposal for reversing the promotion of respondent nos. 4 to 6 to the Government vide his letter No.RB/Desk-1/EST3/58424/2011 dated 14.12.2011. It appears that, the State Government has not taken a decision on the said proposal. In the circumstances, we direct respondent no.1 to take a decision on the said proposal as expeditiously as possible, however, by the end of April, 2016, and communicate the said decision to the petitioners, and respondent nos. 2, 4, 5 and 6. AGP/-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD (2) WP NOs.1630/2013,1629/2013 3.

The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that, after filing this petition, two days prior to the date of retirement, respondent nos. 4 to 6 have been promoted on the post of Naib Tehsildar. In that respect, liberty to the petitioner in WP No.1629/2013 to file representation / application to respondent nos. 1 and 2 for granting deemed date of promotion. That representation / application be considered along with the proposal for reversion by respondent no.1 and decision should be taken on the said representation / application within the afore mentioned period. In Writ Petition No.1630/2013 also, liberty to the petitioner to file representation / application to respondent nos. 1 and 2.

As already observed, both the applications / representations should be considered by respondent no.1 along with the proposal submitted by respondent no.2 for reversing promotion of respondent nos. 4 to 6.

The petitions stand disposed of in above terms. Parties to act upon the authenticated copy of this order. ( P.R. BORA, J. ) ( S.S. SHINDE, J. ) ...

AGP/-