Shakuntala Kamlakar Hiwale And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 4742 OF 2016 (Shakuntala Kamlakar Hiwale and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others) ---- Mr. Nilkanth R. Pawar, Advocate holding for Mr. V.A. Bagal, Advocate for the Petitioners Mr. S.B. Yawalkar, A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 4 ---- CORAM :

S.S. SHINDE AND SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

DATE : 4th JULY, 2016 PER COURT :

Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned A.G.P. for respondent Nos. 1 to 4. Despite service of notice on respondent No. 5, none appears for the said respondent.

2.

The learned counsel for the petitioners tendered across the bar the copy of the order dated 20th April, 2016, passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 12271 of 2015 and other connected writ petitions. The same is taken on record and marked "X" for the purpose of identification. He submits that the facts of the present writ petition are identical to that of the above

mentioned writ petitions.

3.

As can be seen from the order dated 20th April, 2016, referred to above, vide the Government Resolution dated 16th June, 2015, relied upon by the petitioners in the above referred writ petitions, the cases of the persons who were appointed on daily wages during the period from 1985-87, have been considered by the Government of Maharashtra. Nagpur Municipal Corporation had forwarded the proposal of the employees on daily wages to the Urban Development Department, Government of Maharashtra and the said Department has issued the aforementioned Resolution. The learned counsel for the petitioners, in the present case, seeks directions to respondent Nos. 1 to 3 to take appropriate decision keeping in view the aforementioned Government Resolution.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners further submits that already, the proposals with recommendation to regularize services of the petitioners have been sent to respondent No. 1.

5.

In the light of above, we direct respondent

Nos. 1 and 2 to take decision on the proposals forwarded by the respondent No. 5, keeping in view the criteria applied and the Government Resolution mentioned hereinabove, even in cases of the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible; however within four months from today.

6.

The writ petition accordingly stands disposed of on above terms.

7.

The parties to act on the authenticated copy of this order.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL] [S.S. SHINDE] JUDGE JUDGE npj/wp4742-2016