( 1 )

wp5323.22

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD

WRIT PETITION NO.5323 OF 2022

1.

Dnyaneshwar Bhagwat Kadam

..

Petitioners

Age.35 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,

R/o. Z.P. School, Ladnandra,

Tal. Selu, Dist. Parbhani.

2.

Khobraji Ramkishan Walwate

Age. 37 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,

R/o. Z.P. School, Nirwadi,

Tal. Selu, Dist. Parbhani.

3.

Savita Nagorao Esankar

Age. 40 years, Occ. Assistant Teacher,

R/o. Z.P. School, Ramnagar,

Tal. Selu, Dist. Parbhani.

Versis

1.

The State of Maharashtra

..

Respondents

Through Secretary,

Rural Development Department,

Mantralaya, Mumbai.

2.

The Divisional Commissioner

Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad.

3.

The Chief Executive Officer,

Zilla Parishad, Parbhani.

4.

The Education Officer,

Zilla Parishad, Parbhani.

Mr.B.S. Shinde, Advocate for the petitioners.

Mr.S.B. Yawalkar, AGP for respondent/State.

Mr.P.P. Dama, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

( 2 )

wp5323.22

CORAM

:

R.D. DHANUKA &

ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.

DATED

:

06.06.2022

ORAL JUDGMENT : [PER : R.D. DHANUKA,J.] :-

01.

Rule. Mr.Yawalkar, learned AGP waives service for respondent

Nos.1 and 2 and learned Counsel Mr. Dama waives service for respondent

Nos.3 and 4. Rule made returnable forthwith.

02.

By this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, the petitioners seek writ of mandamus against respondent No.3 to

consider the claims or representations of the petitioner annexed at Exh. “C” to

the petition as per circular dated 28.06.2018 issued by respondent No.1 for

giving the postings to the petitioners as per their choices by opening the posts

of compulsory vacancies forthwith.

03.

Heard. Learned Counsel for the petitioner invited our attention

to the unreported judgment of this Court delivered on 20.06.2021 in Writ

Petition No.2992 of 2021 – Sanjay Bira Lawate & Ors. Vs. State of

Maharashtra & Ors. with connected petition and submits that similar orders

may be passed in this petition also, in view of identical issue involved in both

( 3 )

wp5323.22

the petitions.

04.

Learned Counsel for petitioner Nos.3 and 4 states that his client

would decide the said representation annexed at Exh. “C” as per circular

dated 28.06.2018 within three weeks from today.

05.

The statement is accepted.

06.

The order that would be passed shall be communicated to the

petitioner within two days from the date of passing of such order. If the

representations of the petitioners are allowed, the consequential relief will be

granted to the petitioners within four weeks thereafter and if the same are

rejected, the petitioners would be at liberty to file appropriate proceeding as

permissible in law. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any view

on the merits of the representations made by the petitioner. All contentions of

both the parties are kept open. The writ petition is allowed in aforesaid

terms. Rule made absolute accordingly.

[ANIL L. PANSARE,J.]

[R.D. DHANUKA,J.]

snk/2022/JUN22/wp5323.22