Shantabai Baburao Bidve v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE

AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD.

WRIT PETITION NO.14432 OF 2017 Shantabai Wd/o Baburao Bidve ... Petitioner.

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others.

... Respondents.

...

Mr.S.D.Dhongade, advocate for the petitioner. Mrs.M.A.Deshpande, Additional Government Pleader for the State.

...

CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA AND A.M. DHAVALE,JJ.

Date : 12.02.2018.

PER COURT :

1.

The present petition is filed against the order passed by the Tribunal rejecting Misc. Application for condonation of delay.

2.

Mr.Dhongade, learned counsel submits that the name of the petitioner was kept in the seniority list and was removed in the year 2013.

The learned counsel submits that as per GR dated 7.12.2015 also the petitioner is entitled for regularisation.

This aspect has not been considered by the Tribunal.

Lastly, the petitioner was given work in the year 2013. The learned counsel submits that liberal approach be taken.

3.

Learned A.G.P. submits that the petitioner is seeking regularisation from 1999. No reason is mentioned for delay of 16 years in filing Original Application. The petitioner has filed Original Application after she has attained the age of retirement. The Tribunal has rightly passed the order.

4.

The Original Application filed by the petitioner is not on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 7.12.2015.

The Original Application was filed on the ground that the petitioner is entitled for regularisation, benefits of permanency and that she deserves to be placed at serial No.2 in the list finalised on 9.7.1999 with further benefits.

5.

The petitioner has retired in the year 2013 and two years after retirement, the petitioner has filed the Original Application seeking directions to include her at serial No.2 in the list prepared in the year 1999.

6.

Such an inordinate delay is not explained. The Tribunal has rightly taken the view.

7.

In light of the above, we are not inclined to entertain the petition. The Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs.

8.

In case the petitioner seeks any benefits pursuant to the GR dated 7.12.2015, the petitioner is at liberty to take such steps as is permissible.

(A.M.DHAVALE,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) asp/office/wp14432.17