Madhav Shankarrao Bhise v. The State Of Maharshtra And ORS
2025:BHC-AUG:31697
IN THE JUDICATURE OF HIGH COURT AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD 965 CONT. PETITION NO. 264 OF 2012 IN WP/7831/2011 Madhav Shankarrao Bhise
VERSUS
The State Of Maharshtra And Ors ...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Jawanjal. AGP for Respondents-State: Mr. S. K. Shirshe Advocate for Respondent No.4, 5 : Mr. Hon Vinayak D. ...
CORAM : ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J.
Dated : November 18, 2025.
PER COURT :- 1.
It is the case of the contempt petitioner that his representation for absorption in the State cadre was required to be decided by the authorities within three months. He claims to have made representations, but the same were not decided in accordance with the directions of this Court. 2.
A reply has been filed by the Commissioner of Municipal Administration stating that the Directorate had not received any instructions or orders from the High Court at Aurangabad, nor had it received a copy of the order dated 14/10/2011. It is further stated that although the Directorate received a letter from the petitioner on 21/10/2011, the petitioner had not submitted his three representations for absorption in the State cadre within the prescribed time limit and not in the prescribed format. It is also pointed out that a criminal case is pending against the petitioner.
3.
Considering the representation dated 21/10/2011, it appears that the petitioner's request was rejected with reasons. It is further noticed that the petitioner had not applied for absorption with the competent authority at Page 1 of
965 CP 264-2012 Aurangabad in pursuance of the Service Rules and revised notification within the prescribed period. Hence, his cadre was not included in the State cadre. It is also clarified that only the employees of Municipal Councils are eligible for absorption, and not the employees of Municipal Corporations; therefore, the petitioner's representation stood disqualified. 4.
Considering the affidavit filed in April 2013, nothing survives in the petition. In the meantime, the petitioner has also retired. The petition is, therefore, disposed of.
( ARUN R. PEDNEKER, J. ) vj gawade/-.
Page 2 of