Sangitrao S. Patil JUDGMENT
Sangitrao S. Patil, J.
1. Common questions of law and facts are involved in both of these writ petitions. Therefore, they are being decided by this common judgment.
2. For the sake of convenience, the petitioners are hereinafter referred to by their first names, i.e. Nagnath and Balaji, respectively.
3. The facts, which are not in dispute, are that Nagnath and Balaji were holding the certificates issued by the District Rehabilitation Officer, Nanded, declaring that they are project affected persons and are entitled to get benefit of the scheme for rehabilitation of the project affected persons in the form of concession in getting the Government service. Nagnath and Balaji applied for being appointed to the post of Laboratory Assistant from the quota meant for project affected persons on 16th April, 1998 and July, 1997 respectively.
4. Balaji was appointed to the post of Laboratory Assistant for a period of 29 days as per the order dated 30th august, 1997. He was again appointed for the same period by another order dated 2nd September, 1998. Apprehending that his services would be terminated, he filed Original Application No. 529 of 2008 before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, Bench at Aurangabad ("Tribunal", for short), seeking regularisation of his services, on 25th September, 1998. Interim relief was granted in his favour on 29th September, 1998, protecting his services during pendency of the Original Application before the Tribunal. Accordingly, he continued to be in service. However, after hearing the matter on merits, the Tribunal dismissed the said Original Application on 9th October, 2009.
5. The application filed by Nagnath for appointment to the post of Laboratory Assistant was not considered for a long period. Therefore, he filed Original Application No. 777/1999 before the Tribunal, seeking directions to the Appointing Authority i.e. the Dean, Government Medical College, Nanded for getting himself appointed to the post of Laboratory Assistant. The Tribunal passed an interim order in favour of Nagnath on 1st November, 1999. In compliance with that order, the Dean, Government Medical College, Nanded issued appointment order in favour of Nagnath on 12th November, 1999 subject to final decision of the Original Application. The said Original Application also came to be dismissed by the Tribunal after hearing the parties on 28th February, 2007.
6. The Dean, Government Medical College, Nanded had opposed both of the Original Applications mainly on the ground that there were only 20 sanctioned posts of Laboratory Assistants, while the quota of 5% meant for the project affected persons was already exhausted and therefore, the above named petitioners were not liable to be appointed or confirmed in the service under the scheme of rehabilitation of the project affected persons.
7. The learned Members of the Tribunal dismissed the Original Applications on the basis of the judgments in the cases of Secretary, State of Karnataka and others v. Umadevi and others MANU/SC/1918/2006 : 2006 AIR SCW 1991 and Rajendra pandurang Pagare and another v. State of Maharashtra and others MANU/MH/0731/2009 : 2009(4) Mh.L.J. 961 respectively, holding that the petitioners have no right to seek appointment and confirmation in the service without following due procedure meant for recruitment even for the post reserved for the project affected persons.
8. The learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the reason shown by the Dean for not appointing the petitioners to the posts of Laboratory Assistants that the quota m........