Rahul S/O Ramesh Bhandekar And Another v. The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Rural Department, Mumbai And ORS.

2025:BHC-NAG:13113-DB 911-WP-6282-2025.odt 1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 6282 of 2025 Rahul s/o Ramesh Bhandekar and another vs.

The State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Rural Department, Mumbai and others ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. I. J. Daudasare, Advocate for petitioners. Ms Kalyani P. Marpakwar, AGP for respondent no.1. Mrs. M. P. Munshi, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 to 4. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- CORAM :- ANIL S. KILOR and RAJNISH R. VYAS, JJ. DATE :- 26th NOVEMBER, 2025 Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

In this petition, proclamation/advertisements dated 29.09.2025 and 09.10.2025 are under challenge. The said advertisements are issued by the respondent no.3 and 4. It is the case of the petitioner that these advertisements were issued for distribution of works enlisted in the said advertisements to the Gram Panchayats. It is submitted that the petitioners are unemployed graduate engineers and as per G. R. dated 05.04.2023 certain works are reserved as per Schedule-3 upto Rs. Five Lakhs to be done by the unemployeed engineers. It is submitted that despite the same, said works are also included in the impugned proclamation. 3.

In reply, Ms Munshi, learned counsel appearing for the respondents - Zilla Parishad, points out that at the bottom of such proclamation, a Schedule is given for processing and allotment of works. It is pointed out that Clause 3 of the same relates with the works to be granted and allotted to the persons like the petitioners who are unemployed engineers. It is submitted that before any decision is taken by the Zilla Parishad in relation to allotment of works to the persons like the petitioners, the present petition came to be filed. There is no decision taken in this regard by the Zilla Parishad and the same is pending.

911-WP-6282-2025.odt 2 4.

In view of the statement made by Ms Munshi, learned counsel appearing for the respondent nos. 3 and 4-Zilla Parishad, we are of the opinion that the present petition is pre-mature. 5.

Accordingly, we dispose of the present writ petition with a direction to the respondent nos. 3 and 4-Zilla Parishad to take into consideration the grievances of the petitioners in the light of Clause 8.3 and Annexure-III to the Government Resolution dated 05.04.2023, while allotting the works. After the decision, the same shall be communicated to the petitioners. A liberty is granted to the petitioners to approach afresh if such occasion arises.

( RAJNISH R. VYAS, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.) Andurkar.