Balaji Vaijnath Nagargoje v. Abhinav Goyal The Chief Executive Officer Zp Latur, Zp Office Latur

2025:BHC-AUG:13539-DB {1} 941-CP-270-2023

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 941 CONT. PETITION NO. 270 OF 2023 IN WP/1497/2023 Balaji Vaijnath Nagargoje ....Petitioner

VERSUS

Abhinav Goyal The Chief Executive Officer ZP Latur, ZP Office Latur & Another .....Respondents .....

Mr. B.R. Kedar, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. U.B. Bondar, Advocate for respondent No. 1 .......

CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE :

07th MAY, 2025 ORDER :

1.

By order dated 13.02.2023, this Court directed respondent-Zilla Parishad to decide representation of the petitioner dated 12.01.2023, by taking into consideration Government Resolution dated 07.04.2021. Accordingly, hearing was held on 09.03.2023 and by order dated 31.3.2023, it was held by respondents that petitioner is not entitled for transfer from Category No. 1 since he has served in the district for 24 years and in the particular school for six years and he is liable to be transferred within district. Petitioner has chosen two options of transfer places, however, he is not transferred at those places. Bhagyawant Punde

{2} 941-CP-270-2023 Thereafter, petitioner has applied under Category No.4. Petitioner has been transferred as per second option given by him at Zilla Parishad School, Wangdari, Tq. Renapur. The transfer process is carried out in terms of Government Resolution dated 07.04.2021 and as per the option given by petitioner. 2.

Petitioner now contends that he is transferred contrary to the guidelines given in Government Resolution dated 07.04.2021 and therefore respondents have disobeyed the orders passed by this Court, which amounts to contempt. 3.

We do not agree with the said submission of the petitioner. Respondents have taken decision on representation of the petitioner as per directions given by this Court. If the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by respondents, he may avail appropriate remedy to challenge the same. We find that order is complied with and therefore Contempt Petition is disposed of.

4.

It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the order of transfer of petitioner passed by respondents.

(MANJUSHA DESHPANDE, J.) (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.) Bhagyawant Punde