Samrat Subodh Thorat And 14 Others v. State Of Mah., Through Its Principal Secretary, Higher And Tech. Education And Another

wp1142.15 1/2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 1142 OF 2015 Samrat Subodh Thorat and others -vsThe State of Maharashtra, thr.ts. Principal Secretary, Higher and Technical Education and anr. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Office notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's Orders.

or directions and Registrar's orders.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Mrs.Anjali Joshi, counsel for the petitioners. Mr. N.S. Khubalkar, AGP for the respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & Z. A. HAQ, JJ.

DATE : 23.10.2015.

By this petition, the petitioners seek a direction to the respondent No.1 to regularize their services as lecturers in the Government Engineering College.

By placing reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench in Writ Petition No.2046 of 2010 (Sachin Ambadas Dawale and others -vs- The State of Maharashtra and one another), the petitioners have sought a direction to the respondents to regularize their services as lecturers.

Shri Khubalkar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing on behalf of the respondents, states on instructions that by a Government Resolution, dated 13/03/2015, the services of the petitioner Nos.2 to 15 have been regularized. It is stated that there was some error while sending the proposal of the petitioner No.1 and hence, the Government Resolution does not regularize the services of the petitioner No.1. It is stated that after correcting the mistake, the proposal of the petitioner No.1 is sent to the respondent No.1 and the respondent No.1 would take a decision on the proposal of the petitioner No.1 at the earliest.

wp1142.15 2/2 By accepting the statement made by the learned Assistant Government Pleader, which would be binding on the respondent No.1, we dispose of the writ petition with a direction to the respondent No.1 to decide the proposal of the petitioner No.1 as early as possible and positively within a period of eight weeks. Order accordingly. No costs.

JUDGE JUDGE KHUNTE