Sultana Jainoddin Shaikh v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 901-WP5244-19.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 5244 OF 2019 Sultana Jainoddin Shaikh .. Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Others .. Respondents Mr. B. S. Shinde, Advocate for Petitioner.

Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondents-State.

Mr. K. B. Jadhavar, Advocate for Respondent No. 3. Mr. S. B. Ghute, Advocate for Respondent No. 4. CORAM :

S. V. GANGAPURWALA & MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ DATED : 14th AUGUST, 2019.

PER COURT:- 1.

The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the respondent Beed Zilla Parishad has given no objection to relieve the petitioner, but the respondent Aurangabad Zilla Parishad is not allowing the petitioner to join. 2.

Mr. Ghute, the learned Counsel submits that the posts are not available with the Aurangabad Zilla Parishad. As and when the post would be vacant, the petitioner would be allowed to join and the claim of the petitioner would be considered.

3.

In view of the aforesaid statement Writ Petition is disposed of. No costs.

( MANGESH S. PATIL ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE P.S.B.