High Court of Bombay Issues Rule in Writ Petition Against Municipal Corporation's Absorption of Builder's Employees. The Court entertained the challenge under Article 226 to Resolution No. 25 and order dated 27.06.2007 absorbing 69 persons, directing final hearing forthwith.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY
  • 5
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioners, 69 unemployed youths from Thane district, filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. They challenged the actions of the Mira Bhayander Municipal Corporation (MBMC). The petitioners had applied for 170 posts of Safai Kamgars advertised by MBMC in 2006. Despite being interviewed, no final selection list was declared. Petitioner No.2 inquired and was informed that the entire selection process had been scrapped. Meanwhile, MBMC passed Resolution No. 25 on 14th June 2007 and issued an order on 27th June 2007, absorbing 69 employees from a builder's water supply system. The petitioners alleged that this was a backdoor entry for persons connected to officers and employees of the Corporation, and that the resolution falsely recorded a unanimous decision. They contended that the absorption was illegal, arbitrary, and discriminatory, hastily done just before the Model Code of Conduct for municipal elections. Some corporators had objected. The petitioners sought quashing of the resolution and order, revival of the selection process, and action against responsible officers. The High Court issued Rule and, by consent, heard the matter finally. The case was reserved on 8th May 2012 and pronounced on 11th June 2012. The judgment outcome is not provided in the excerpt.

Issue of Consideration

Whether the impugned Resolution No. 25 dated 14th June, 2007 and order dated 27th June, 2007 absorbing 69 employees are illegal and arbitrary? Whether the cancellation of the recruitment process for Class IV posts (Safai Kamgars) initiated by respondent No.2 is valid?

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Law Points

  • Article 226 of the Constitution of India
  • Writ of Mandamus
  • Backdoor appointments
  • Cancellation of recruitment process
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2012 LawText (BOM) (06) 25

Writ Petition No. 3277 of 2011

2012-06-11

A.M. Khanwilkar, S.S. Shinde

Mr. Sandesh Patil with Mr. Prashant Jadhav for Petitioners; Mr. C.R. Sonawane, AGP for Respondent No. 1; Mr. N.R. Bubna for Respondent No. 2; Mr. S.M. Oak with Mr. Sagar Joshi for Respondent Nos. 4 to 8, 16, 19, 23, 24, 32 to 36, 38, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 51, 52, 55, 57, 60, 61 and 68

Jayesh Dayaram Bhoir & Others

State of Maharashtra & Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition under Article 226 challenging the Municipal Corporation's resolution and order absorbing builder's employees and scrapping recruitment process for Class IV posts

Remedy Sought

Quash Resolution No. 25 dated 14.06.2007 and order dated 27.06.2007; revive and complete selection process initiated by respondent No. 2 pursuant to advertisements dated 18.02.2006 and 21.08.2006; direct action against officers

Filing Reason

Alleged illegal absorption of 69 employees from a builder's water supply system by the Corporation without proper recruitment process, and arbitrary cancellation of the selection process for Safai Kamgars for which petitioners had applied

Previous Decisions

The selection process initiated in 2006 was scrapped; the Corporation passed resolution and order absorbing employees; petitioners' representations yielded no relief

Issues

Whether Resolution No. 25 dated 14th June, 2007 and order dated 27th June, 2007 absorbing 69 employees are illegal and arbitrary? Whether the cancellation of the recruitment process for Safai Kamgars is valid? Whether the petitioners are entitled to revival of the selection process and quashing of the impugned actions?

Submissions/Arguments

The petitioners contended that the respondent No.2 made sham exercise of calling candidates through public advertisements but scrapped the process and made backdoor appointments of persons related to officers/employees. The resolution was passed without data and hastily before the Code of Conduct; some corporators objected. The absorption of 69 employees was illegal and discriminatory.

Judgment Excerpts

Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. Counsel for respective respondents waive notice. By consent, heard finally forthwith. the impugned Resolution No. 25 dated 14th June, 2007 passed by the respondent No.2 and order dated 27th June, 2007 is illegal and bad in law

Procedural History

Writ petition filed under Article 226; rule issued; by consent heard finally; reserved on 8th May 2012 and pronounced on 11th June 2012.

Acts & Sections

  • Constitution of India: Article 226
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Petition to Quash Property Tax Demand for Non-Compliance with Natural Justice. Assessment Order Set Aside as No Opportunity of Hearing Was Given Before Imposing Tax Under Maharashtra Municipal Corporation Act, 1949.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case Due to Inconsistent Evidence and Age Discrepancy. Conviction for Kidnapping and Rape Set Aside as Prosecutrix's Age Not Proven Beyond Reasonable Doubt and Testimony Lacked Corroboration.