Wardha Zilla Arogya Seva Karmachari Sangh Thrrough Executive President, U. N. Barbatkar And Anothe v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary, General Admn. Deptt., Mumbai And Others

2311wp6321.15.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.6321/2015 Wardha Zilla Arogya Seva Karmachari Sangh through its Executive President and another ...Versus...

The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, General Administrative Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 and others - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - S/Shri A.I. Sheikh & Mir Nagman Ali, Advs. for petitioners Shri N.R. Patil, AGP for respondent nos.1, 2 and 4 CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK AND PRASANNA B. VARALE, JJ.

DATE : 23.11.2015 By this petition, the petitioners challenge the advertisements issued by the respondents on 31.10.2015 and 5.11.2015, inviting applications for appointment on the posts of Health Attendants (Female) and Sweepers.

According to the petitioners, the members of the petitioner - Sangh are working with the respondents on contract basis and the respondents are not entitled to issue the advertisement. It is stated that the petitioners have made representations to the respondents and without deciding the representations of the petitioners, the respondents have issued the advertisement.

2311wp6321.15.odt On hearing the learned Counsel for the parties, we find that the relief sought by the petitioners cannot be granted. The advertisement cannot be quashed and set aside. Admittedly, the members of the petitioner - Sangh are not appointed after following the due procedure of selection i.e. issuance of advertisement, appearing for interview etc. It is well settled that appointments made without following the due procedure of selection would be illegal. It would be necessary to refer to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2007 (6) Mh.L.J.667, 2011 AIR SCW 1332, 2014 (2) SCALE 264. Even the judgment reported in 2014 (7) SCC 223 cannot come to the rescue of the petitioners for seeking regularization, as none of the members of the petitioner - Sangh are working with the respondents on contract basis for more than 10 years. Some of the members of the petitioner - Sangh have been appointed recently on contract basis i.e. in the year 2014.

In the circumstances of the case, we dismiss the writ petition with no order as to costs.

JUDGE JUDGE Wadkar