Bhanudas Santaram Gaikwad And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 13538.18

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 13538 OF 2018 Bhanudas S/o. Santaram Gaikwad and others .. Petitioners

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and others .. Respondents Shri Mahesh R. Sonwane, Advocate for Petitioners. Shri S. K. Tambe, A.G.P. for Respondent Nos.1, 4 and 5. Shri N. D. Batule, Advocate for Respondent No.6. Shri M. S. Shah, Advocate for Respondent No.7. CORAM :

S. V. GANGAPURWALA AND S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATE :

10TH FEBRUARY, 2022.

FINAL ORDER :

.

The learned advocate for the Municipal Council submits that, process for absorbing the sweepers is under way. Provisional seniority list has been published. Some objections are received. The objections are under consideration and within fifteen (15) days seniority list would be finalized. After finalization of the seniority list, the proposal would be submitted to the Collector for necessary action.

2.

In view of the above as far as prayer clause 'B' is concerned the same would stand redressed. Under other prayer clauses, the petitioners seek directions to consider them for absorption and promotion. As the seniority list is being prepared, the

2 wp 13538.18 further process will have to be undertaken in view of the final seniority list.

3.

The statement is made that after seniority list is finalized, the proposal would be submitted to the Collector for regularization and absorption of these sweepers. According to us, the major purpose of the writ petition stands subserved. 4.

We may hasten to add, the municipal council shall initiate the process of sending the proposal for absorption as contended by it. If the finalization of the seniority list is done, the proposal may be submitted to the Collector expeditiously and preferably within a period of one (01) month from the date of finalization of seniority list.

5.

With the aforesaid observations, we dispose of the writ petition. No costs.

6.

In case the claim of the petitioners is not considered within reasonable time, then the petitioners will have liberty to agitate afresh.

[S. G. DIGE, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] bsb/Feb.22