Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Direct Recruitment of Ward of Class IV Employee Under Government Resolutions. Petitioner Entitled to Appointment as He Fulfilled Conditions of GR Dated 14th April 1981.

High Court: Bombay High Court Bench: BOMBAY In Favour of Accused
  • 3
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The petitioner, Vikas Dhanaji Sawant, filed a writ petition challenging the judgment and order dated 17th April 2014 of the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) dismissing his Original Application No. 80 of 2013. The petitioner sought appointment to a Class IV post in government service on account of the retirement of his father, who was a Class IV employee at the Government Central Press, Mumbai. Before his retirement w.e.f. 1st September 2002, the petitioner's father made an application dated 4th January 2002 requesting the respondent no. 3 (The Manager, Government Central Press, Mumbai) to appoint his son to a Class IV post. The petitioner and his father relied upon Government Resolutions (GRs) dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990, which provided that wards of Class IV employees are entitled to be directly recruited to Class IV posts in government service, subject to fulfillment of conditions prescribed in the GR dated 14th April 1981. The petitioner contended that he fulfilled all the conditions and that the respondents were not justified in denying direct recruitment. The court heard the learned counsel for the parties and, by consent, made the rule returnable forthwith. The court found that the petitioner fulfilled all conditions and allowed the petition, setting aside the Tribunal's order.

Headnote

A) Service Law - Direct Recruitment - Wards of Class IV Employees - Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990 - The petitioner, son of a Class IV employee, sought appointment to a Class IV post upon his father's retirement. The court held that the petitioner fulfilled all conditions prescribed in the GRs and was entitled to direct recruitment. The Tribunal's dismissal was set aside. (Paras 3-5)

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the petitioner is entitled to direct recruitment to a Class IV post in government service under the Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990, and whether the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal erred in dismissing the Original Application.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The petition is allowed. The judgment and order dated 17th April 2014 made by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissing the petitioner's Original Application No. 80 of 2013 is set aside. The respondents are directed to consider the petitioner's application for direct recruitment to a Class IV post in accordance with the Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990.

Law Points

  • Direct recruitment of wards of Class IV employees
  • Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990
  • Fulfillment of conditions
  • Entitlement to appointment
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2018 LawText (BOM) (06) 101

Writ Petition No. 2170 of 2015

2018-06-05

Smt. V. K. Tahilramani, Acting C. J., M. S. Sonak, J.

Ms Neeta Gaikwad for Petitioner, Mr. N. C. Walimbe – AGP for State - Respondents

Vikas Dhanaji Sawant

The State of Maharashtra & Ors.

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

Nature of Litigation

Writ petition challenging the dismissal of Original Application by Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal seeking appointment to a Class IV post.

Remedy Sought

Appointment to a Class IV post in government service on account of retirement of petitioner's father.

Filing Reason

Denial of direct recruitment to the petitioner under Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990.

Previous Decisions

Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal dismissed Original Application No. 80 of 2013 on 17th April 2014.

Issues

Whether the petitioner is entitled to direct recruitment to a Class IV post under the Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990.

Submissions/Arguments

Petitioner's counsel submitted that the petitioner fulfills all conditions prescribed in the GR dated 14th April 1981 and therefore the respondents were not justified in denying direct recruitment.

Ratio Decidendi

The petitioner, being the ward of a Class IV employee, is entitled to direct recruitment to a Class IV post under the Government Resolutions dated 14th April 1981 and 6th March 1990, subject to fulfillment of conditions, which the petitioner satisfied.

Judgment Excerpts

The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and order dated 17th April 2014 made by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) dismissing the petitioner's Original Application No. 80 of 2013 seeking appointment to a class IV post in government service on account of retirement of his father who was also a class IV employee. Ms Gaikwad, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner fulfills all the conditions prescribed in the GR dated 14th April 1981 and therefore the respondents were not justified in denying direct recruitment to the petitioner.

Procedural History

The petitioner's father made an application on 4th January 2002 for appointment of his son. The petitioner filed Original Application No. 80 of 2013 before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, which was dismissed on 17th April 2014. The petitioner then filed Writ Petition No. 2170 of 2015 before the Bombay High Court, which was allowed on 5th June 2018.

Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Appeal in Part, Alters Conviction from Culpable Homicide to Voluntarily Causing Hurt by Dangerous Weapons. Medical Negligence Intervening Cause Breaks Chain of Causation for Death Under Section 304 Part II IPC.
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petition for Direct Recruitment of Ward of Class IV Employee Under Government Resolutions. Petitioner Entitled to Appointment as He Fulfilled Conditions of GR Dated 14th April 1981.