Jayram Babanrao Sanap v. The Union Of India And Others

{1} wp910.18.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 910 OF 2018 Jayram s/o Babanrao Sanap Petitioner

Versus

The Union of India & others Respondents Mr. K.B. Khade, advocate for petitioner.

Mr. A.G. Talhar, advocate for respondents 1 and 2. CORAM : R.M.BORDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

DATE : 19th MARCH, 2018 PER COURT:

1.

Petitioner claims that he is eligible to seek appointment to the post of Constable in the Central Industrial Security Force and as such, tendered application seeking appointment. On consideration of the application tendered by petitioner he was issued call letter on 16.03.2015. Petitioner claims that he has been provisionally selected for appointment and communication in that regard has been issued by respondent on 16.03.2017. Petitioner however, has not been issued letter of appointment since the matter has been referred to the 18th Standing Screening Committee.

2.

The petitioner was involved in a criminal case prior to his selection and has already been acquitted. There does not appear to be any stigma attached since the petitioner has already been acquitted from the charges levelled against him. On the date of

{2} wp910.18.odt submission of the application, the criminal case was not pending and the same was already disposed of. In the circumstances, the Standing Screening Committee should have considered the case of petitioner in proper perspective and ought to have taken decision. The ends of justice would meet if direction is issued to the competent authority to take appropriate decision in respect of appointment of petitioner in furtherance of his selection, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six weeks from today and it is accordingly directed. Writ petition stands disposed of.

K. K. SONAWANE R.M.BORDE JUDGE JUDGE dyb