JUDGMENT/ORDER

R.D.DHANUKA, J. - Rule. Mr. Anturkar, learned senior counsel waives service for the Respondent No.1. Learned AGP waives service for Respondent No.2. Mr. Naidu, learned counsel waives service for Respondent No.3. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.

2. Interim Application is filed by the Applicant inter alia praying for impleadment as party-Respondent No.4 in the writ petition. Learned counsel for the parties have agreed that at this stage, they will address this Court only on the issue as to whether the learned Single Member of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (for short "the Tribunal ") has jurisdiction to decide the Original Application No.990 of 2022 or the Original Application could be heard only by the Division Bench of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal. This Court recorded the statement made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties in the order dtd. 11/4/2023 that they would address this Court only on the limited issue as aforesaid and not on merit. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under :-

3. It is the case of the Respondent No.1 that the Petitioner does not belong to the Municipal Administrative Service and his parent department is Sales Tax Department. He was appointed as Deputy Commissioner, Vasai-Virar Municipal Corporation on deputation on 11/8/2020. By an order dtd. 22/9/2022, he was appointed as Additional Commissioner, Pimpari-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation (PCMC) on deputation for two years. By an order dtd. 22/9/2022, the Petitioner was brought in the cadre of Deputy Commissioner Sales Tax Department Class-1 (Selection grade).

4. In so far as the Respondent No.1 is concerned, it is her case that she was appointed as Assistant Commissioner, PCMC by an order dtd. 5/1/2018. Since then she was serving in the said department. She was in the cadre of Chief Officer, Group A. She was thereafter given selection grade and posted as Additional Commissioner, PCMC by an order dtd. 1/2/2021.

5. It is the case of the Respondent No.1 that in view of the Government Resolutions dtd. 1/9/2014 and 22/2/2022 issued by the Urban Development Department, certain posts of Commissioners and Additional Commissioners are earmarked for particular cities depending upon the classification of the Municipal Corporation viz-a-viz population of the city. In so far as PCMC is concerned, it is classified as "B " Class Municipal Corporation. The Government had taken policy decision to appoint Chief Officer in selection grade on the post of Additional Commissioner at a Municipal Corporation where population exceeds five lacs. According to the Respondent No.1, preference is given to the Chief Officer Group A in selection grade for appointment as Additional Commissioner in big city so as to exploit their experience and expertise for Municipal Administration.

6. It is the case of the Respondent No.1 that the Applicant was appointed as Additional Collector of Pimpari-Chinchwad Municipal Corporation in view of the order passed by the Hon 'ble Chief Minister to appoint the Respondent No.1 as Additional Commissioner with PCMC on 22/8/2022. The Respondent No.1 was issued a formal order for appointment on 13/9/2022 by exercising powers under Sec. 39A of the Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act.

7. It is the case of the Respondent No.1 that she was not allowed to join PCMC abruptly by an order dtd. 22/9/2022. Her appointment has been cancelled and Petitioner was appointed without giving any reason whatsoever. The Respondent No.1 accordingly filed the original application before the Tribunal inter alia praying for setting aside the order of cancellation of appointment of the Respondent No.1 and appointing the Petitioner to the said post.

8. The said matter was heard by a Single Member of the Tribunal. The Petitioner raised an objection on 30/11/2022 that the learned member had no jurisdiction to decide the original applica