Avinash S/O Gangadhar Shankarpurkar v. Govt. Of Maharashtra, Thr. Prin. Secretary, Ministry Of Energy, Mumbai And ORS.

1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR .

WRIT PETITION NO. 3964 OF 2026 Avinash S/o Gangadhar Shankarpurkar Vs.

Govt. Of Maharashtra, Thr. Prin. Secretary, Ministry Of Energy, Mumbai And Ors.

_________________________________________________________________________ _ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. Dilip. Ambade, Advocate for the Petitioner (s). Mr. D.P. Thakre, Addl. GP, for the Respondent-State. CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE : 08 th MAY, 2026.

1.

Heard Mr. Dilip Ambade, the learned counsel for the petitioner.

2.

The petitioner, who is an employee of Respondent No. 2Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Limited, has approached this Court seeking directions to the respondents not to issue a transfer order in respect of the petitioner. The reason for such prayer, as per the learned counsel for the petitioner, is the list at Page No. 34.

3.

The perusal of the aforesaid list reveals that the name of the petitioner has been included therein, and hence, the petitioner

2/3 apprehends that he will be transferred, as the aforesaid list has been prepared solely for the purpose of transferring the petitioner. The perusal of the title of the list reveals that it is the list of Assistant Engineers (Dist.) with Zone tenure of 15 years and above, as per the Zone Data, and not the list of employees who are eligible for being transferred.

4.

Further, the aforesaid list has been attached to an e-mail dated 24.03.2026, which was sent to all the employees, thereby calling upon them to find attached the aforesaid list and raise objections if there are any errors, missing entries, or corrections needed in the aforesaid list.

5.

The petitioner, in response to the aforesaid e-mail, has already raised an objection before the respondents on 02.04.2026. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is not eligible to be included in the aforesaid list of employees who have completed the tenure of 15 years in the Zone. Similar is the objection raised by the petitioner to the aforesaid list vide the objection dated 02.04.2026.

6.

The respondents have not yet decided such objections nor finalized such list, and hence, the aforesaid apprehension as expressed by the petitioner is unfounded. Therefore, the petition cannot be entertained.

7.

However, the respondents, more particularly the Assistant General Manager, HR, Nagpur Zone, Nagpur, are directed to

3/3 consider and decide the aforesaid objections dated 02.04.2026 submitted by the petitioner, which are on record at Page No. 63 (Annexure XII), on their merits and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of. (RAJ. D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)