Deepika Arun Balsane v. Sachin Shripat Pawar And Others

*1* kps

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD CIVIL APPLICATION NO.6298 OF 2015 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3154 OF 2012 DEEPIKA ARUN BALSANE

VERSUS

SACHIN SHRIPAT PAWAR AND OTHERS.

...

Advocate for Applicant : Mr.Sangeet M.L.

Advocate for Respondent No.1 : Mr.Godbole R.J.. Advocate for Respondent Nos.5 to 7 : Mr.R.B.Temak. Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : Mr.P.R.Patil. AGP for State : Mrs.V.A.Shinde.

...

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 3154 OF 2012 SACHIN SHRIPAT PAWAR

VERSUS

PRESIDENT, UNIVERSAL EDUCATION ACADEMY AND ORS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr.Godbole R.J.

Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3 : Mr.P.R.Patil. Advocate for Respondent Nos.4 to 6 : Mr.R.B.Temak. AGP for State : Mrs.V.A.Shinde.

...

CORAM: RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.

DATE :- 12th June, 2015 Per Court:

(a) Civil Application No.6298/2015:-

*2* By this Civil Application, the Applicant prays for permission to be arrayed as Respondent No.8 in the Writ Petition on the ground that she has been appointed in place of the original Petitioner whose services were terminated. The approval to her appointment is still pending with the competent authority only because of the pendency of this Writ Petition. Mr.Godbole, learned Advocate appearing for the original Petitioner, opposes the application on the ground that the engagement of the Applicant in place of the original Petitioner is lookout of the Management and it is for the Management to justify the said appointment. The appearance of the Applicant is not required. Mr.P.R.Patil, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the Management, submits that the Applicant herein was appointed in place of the Petitioner. If any rights have accrued to the Applicant, she can independently support her claim. If this application is allowed, the appearance of the Applicant as Respondent No.8 would assist the Court in deciding the Writ Petition.

Considering the fact situation as recorded above, I am of the view that this Civil Application can be allowed since the addition of the Applicant, whose rights are likely to be affected in the event the petition is

*3* allowed, would enable her to present her case in this petition. As such, this Civil Application is allowed and the original Petitioner is directed to array the Applicant, namely, Deepika Arun Balsane as Respondent No.8 in the Writ Petition within a period of TWO WEEKS from today. A copy of the Writ Petition be accordingly served on the added Respondent No.8. Mr.Sangeet causes an appearance on behalf of the added Respondent No.8 and submits that a separate notice need not be issued on the Writ Petition.

(b) Writ Petition No.3154/2012:- In the light of the order passed today in Civil Application No.6298/2015, stand over to 15.07.2015. The parties to note that if possible, the petition would be heard finally at admission stage. All the Respondents including the added Respondent are at liberty to file their affidavit in reply and complete the pleadings on or before 10.07.2015. (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)