← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/4421/2023disposed off

Moreshwar Dashrath Waghmare v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mumbai And Others

2023-07-18Hon'Ble Shri Justice A.S. Chandurkar,Hon'Ble Mrs. Justice Vrushali V. Joshi1 pages

1 WP-4421-2023.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR Writ Petition No.4421 of 2023 Moreshwar Dashrath Waghmare Versus State of Maharashtra and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court'

s orders of directions Court' s or Judge'

s order and Registrar'

s orders.

Shri A.R. Ingole, Counsel for Petitioner.

Ms N.P. Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent Nos.1 and 2. CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI , JJ.

ATE : 18 th JULY, .

1.

The petitioner, who claims to be duly qualified for being appointed on the post of Laboratory Attendant, was issued a communication dated 1-12-2008, in which it was stated that his name was recommended for being appointed as Laboratory Attendant with the Tribal Welfare Department. No steps were taken thereafter either by the petitioner or by the respondents and ultimately the petitioner on the basis of the information received under the provisions of the Right to Information Act, 2005 in 2018 has now approached this Court praying that the respondents be directed to consider appointing the petitioner on the post of Laboratory Attendant.

2.

On perusal of the averments in the writ petition, we do not find any explanation on the part of the petitioner for his inaction from 2008 till today. Except for stating that he has orally requested the respondents to grant appointment, there is no document on record to indicate that the petitioner had in fact taken the steps to seek his appointment. Moreover, the petitioner has stated that he is aged of 52 years. In these facts, we find that the writ petition suffers from unexplained delay and laches. We are therefore not inclined to entertain the writ petition.

3.

The writ petition is disposed of. Needless to state that the petitioner is free to take such steps as are permissible in law for redressal of his grievance. No costs.

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.) LANJEWAR 16:16 LANJEWAR