Gajnan Laxmikant Rudrawar v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8029 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6505 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.8049 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6394 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13837 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6860 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13841 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6867 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13848 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6414 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13868 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13870 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13873 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13876 OF 2017 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.13877 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7009 OF 2016 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO.12817 OF 2017 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 8442 OF 2016 Rajkumar s/o Marotrao Warle ...Applicants

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and another

...Respondents

---- Mr V.A. Dhakne, advocate for applicant Mr. R.V .Dasalkar, Asstt.Govt.Pleader for respondents ---- CORAM : T.V. Nalawade & Sangitrao S. Patil, JJ.

DATE : November, 20, 2017 PER COURT :

1 CAS 8029-17(7) All the civil applications are filed for modifying, recalling the order made by this Court against the applicants of imposing cost of Rs.15,000/- on them. This amount was to be deposited by them with Zilla Parishad. The order was made by holding that they did not join the duty after their transfer at new places and thereby they caused inconvenience to Zilla Parisdhad. This Court had not imposed cost on those employees, who had joined their new posting, though they had challenged the order in this Court. It is the specific contention of the present applicants that they had joined the new posting immediately, thought they had challenged the order of transfer.

2.

Learned counsel for applicants from Civil Application No.12817 of 2017 submits that, these employees had joined both the new stations when they were transferred within month two times. These submissions are not disputed by learned counsel for Zilla Parishad. It can be said that due to oversight, the order of imposing cost is made against these applicants and that order needs to be recalled.

3.

In the result, all the civil applications are allowed. The order of imposing cost on these applicants is recalled.

1 CAS 8029-17(7) 4.

If any departmental action is started on the basis of the order of cost made by this Court, the Zilla Parishad is to see it that the effect of the present order is considered in that proceeding also.

5.

Civil Application 12817/2017 is filed for condonation of delay. The delay is condoned. Separate number to be treated as and that application is allowed in aforesaid terms. [ SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J. ] [ T.V. NALAWADE, J. ] nbs/1(7)-20