(B.R. GAVAI, J.)

1. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner seeks leave to delete Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. Leave to delete Respondent Nos. 2 to 4 is granted. Amendment be carried out forthwith.

2. Learned Government Pleader Mr. S.V. Kurundkar waives service of notice for Respondent No.1/State. Learned advocate Mr. S.S. Thombre waives service of notice for Respondent No. 2.

3. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by consent.

4. By way of present Writ Petition, the petitioner impugns the judgement and order dated 14th October, 2011, passed by the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No. 456/2011 filed by the present petitioner.

5. The petition arises out of certain glaring facts which are capsulized in nutshell as under.

The Respondent No. 2, namely, Vishwanath Babunath Nath, was working as Executive Engineer, Majalgaon Canal Division No. 10, Parbhani. Undisputedly, Respondent No. 2 had not completed his three years' tenure on the said post at Parbhani. However, it appears that Respondent No. 2 was in the zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer. As per the relevant Rules, for being promoted as Superintending Engineer, an employee is required to have worked on a non-executive post. Respondent No. 2 accordingly addressed a communication dated 21st February, 2011 to the Respondent No. 1, thereby requesting to post him to a non-executive post since he was likely to be promoted as a Superintending Engineer. In that communication, he had also given choice of his posting at Central Design Organization, Nashik. Vide order dated 31st May, 2011, Respondent No. 2 was transferred from Parbhani as Executive Engineer-cum-Under Secretary, Water Supply Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai. However, the said posting was on the post that was to be fallen vacant at the end of June, 2011 on superannuation of Shri D.A. Jadhav. The petitioner, who was working as Executive Engineer, at Jaikwadi, Paithan, vide the same order, was transferred a Executive Engineer, Majalgaon Canal Division No. 10, Gangakhed, Parbhani, which was a post likely to become vacant on account of transfer of Respondent No. 2. Accordingly, the petitioner had attempted to join his place of posting. However, it appears that since Respondent No. 2 was not present to give charge, the petitioner made a representation to the Deputy Superintending Engineer. The Deputy Superintending Engineer, vide communication dated 8th June, 2011, addressed to the Chief Engineer and Chief Administrator, C.A.D.A., Aurangabad, informed him that Respondent No. 2 had left the office without his leave being sanctioned from 6th June, 2011 to 8th June, 2011. The said letter states that Respondent No. 2 without getting his leave sanctioned has unilaterally taken the leave and left the office and that he is absent in the office of the Executive Engineer. It is further stated that it is necessary that the Executive Engineer should be present in the office. As such, it was recommended that the petitioner should be permitted to take the unilateral charge. In the meantime, Respondent No. 2 had approached the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal by way of filing Original Application No. 356/2011. The learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, vide order dated 6th June, 2011, on the very first date and even without issuing notice to the present petitioner, who was impleaded as Respondent No. 5 in the said Original Application, passed the following order.

"The applicant shall remain incharge of his present posting of Executive Engineer, Majalgaon Canal, Division No. 10, Parbhani till 22.6.2011 (Noon) and shall handover the charge of the said post on 22.6.2011 either before-noon or afternoon to respondent No. 5 or any other officer and shall avail joining time from 22.6.2011 afternoon till 30.6.2011 and shall join on the post of Under Secretary, Water Resources, Mantralaya, Mumbai on 1st July, 2011. Accordingly,