Bhaidas Harji Rathod v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Others

2025:BHC-AUG:34095-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 925 WRIT PETITION NO.14542 OF 2025 BHAIDAS HARJI RATHOD

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Mr. P.B. Patil (Borse), Advocate for petitioner Mr. S.B. Narwade, AGP for State ...

CORAM :

SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

DATE :

04th DECEMBER, 2025 ORDER :

.

Present petition has been filed for following reliefs : "B) By Writ of Mandamus or any other kind of appropriate Writ like nature or orders and directions, directions may kindly be given to respondent No.1 quasi-judicial authority to decide pending Appeal dated 15.02.2023 of the petitioner, which is annexed at Exh. "C" within stipulated period of 6 weeks."

The petitioner says that he was appointed as Peon with effect

925_WP_14542_2025 from 01.02.2010 and from 15.06.2012 it is his permanent appointment. Respondent No.4 rejected the approval to the post of petitioner by order dated 11.12.2020, which he had then challenged before respondent No.1. He was given approval by the said order dated 28.05.2021 and even there is an order of granting him back wages from 01.06.2014. It appears that by the said order of respondent No.1 approval was granted to his post from 01.06.2014 and not from the date of his appointment i.e. 01.02.2010 and, therefore, he approached Hon'ble Minister, Other Backward Class Welfare Department and the said appeal is still pending. Learned AGP places on record communication of today's date, wherein observations from Writ Petition No.3786 of 2022 decided by Hon'ble Single Bench of this Court have been placed on record, wherein certain observations have been made in respect of invoking Government Resolution dated 03.10.2017 and, therefore, it is stated that the appeal cannot be asked to be decided now as it is not maintainable.

Learned Advocate for petitioner disputes this position. We are not going into the merits of the case, however, taking into consideration the pendency of the appeal which has to be taken to the logical end some order needs to be passed on the same and, therefore, we dispose of the writ

925_WP_14542_2025 petition by giving directions to respondent No.2 to adopt new procedure of law for disposal of the said appeal. With these observations writ petition stands disposed of.

( HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J. ) ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI, J. ) agd