Sunita Tarachand Thakur v. State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 988-WP-7922-2020

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7922 OF 2020 Sunita Tarachand Thakur

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

Mr S.S. Phatale, Advocate for Petitioner Mr K.N. Lokhande, A.G.P. for Respondent-State CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

DATE : 2nd FEBRUARY, 2021 PER COURT :

1.

The learned counsel submits that the validation proceeding in respect of the tribe claim of the petitioner is pending with the Committee. 2.

The employer has issued notice directing the petitioner to submit the validity certificate or else, adverse action would be initiated. 3.

Though respondent No. 3 served, none appears for respondent No. 3.

4.

To get the validity proceeding decided within stipulated period is not in the hands of the litigants.

5.

It is submitted that vigilance is completed. The petitioner has filed say to the vigilance report. The hearing is also concluded in the year 2017, but the decision is not taken.

2 988-WP-7922-2020 6.

In case the validation proceeding is still pending with respondent No. 2, then respondent No. 2 shall decide the said proceeding within a period of three months from the date of appearance of the petitioner.

7.

The petitioner shall appear before the Committee on 22nd February, 2021.

8.

The impugned notice is quashed and set aside. 9.

The employer may take further course of action depending upon the judgment that would be delivered by the Committee in the validation proceeding.

10.

The writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

[ SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J. ] [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. ] mta