1 IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY C.A.J. WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 3071 OF 2004 PETITION NO. 3071 OF 2004 PETITION NO. 3071 OF 2004 Shri. Santosh Madhukar Parbat ... Petitioner Vs. The President, Kurduwadi Municipal Council, Kurduwadi and Ors. ... Respondents Mr. V.B. Naik with Mr. A.M. Kulkarni for Petitioner. Mr. V.B. Rajure for R. Nos. 1 and 2. Mr. R.M. Patne, A.G.P. for R. No. 6. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & S.P. S.P. S.P. KUKDAY,JJ. KUKDAY,JJ. KUKDAY,JJ. DATED DATED DATED : MAY 05, 2005 : MAY 05, 2005 : MAY 05, 2005 P.C. P.C. P.C. . It is the case of Petitioner that he was appointed as Shikshan Sevak firstly between the period of 30.11.2000 to 30.4.2001 after being selected on 10.11.2000. It is his further case that thereafter he worked between 4.6.2001 and 3.4.2002 and thereafter between 1.6.2002 to 30.4.2003. The Standing Committee in fact passed a resolution on 8.12.2000. It is his further case that he has continued to work upto 15.2.2004. During this period, between 2003-04 he has been conducting 37 lectures which is the full time quota for regular vacancy. It is on this basis that the Petitioner prayed for the reliefs as set out in the Prayer Clauses (a), (b) and (c). 2 . On behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 an affidavit has been filed opposing grant of reliefs. It is pointed out in the said affidavit that the appointment was only for the period between 30.1.2000 to 30.4.2001. Thereafter no further letter of appointment was issued to the Petitioner and in these circumstances, the reliefs as prayed for cannot be granted. . Apart from that it is pointed out that in terms of the G.R. there is committee appointed which can go into the issue of appointments. This being purely a case of appointment, the petitioner can approach the said committee for resolution of his dispute. . We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The issue as to whether the Petitioner was appointed subsequent to 30.4.2001 would be an issue, on which a finding of fact will have to be recorded and subsequent continuance thereof, considering the stand of the Chief Officer, in his affidavit that no letters of appointment were issued in favour of the Petitioner. The Petitioner belongs to the open category. It is further set out that the posts available are for reserved category candidates. This fact is however, 3 disputed on behalf of the Petitioners. . Considering the above facts and as the matter pertains to the appointment, in our opinion, this will be a fit case where the Petitioners is directed to approach the Grievance committee. The grievance committee considering the facts of this case as it pertains to appointment, will consider the representation made by the Petitioner if made within four weeks from today and dispose of the same according to law after hearing the respondents and their say. It will be open to the committee, if it comes to the conclusion that the Petitioner was appointed as Shikshan Sevak for the period of three years and a regular vacancy for open category is available, to give direction to respondents to direct appointment of Petitioner on regular basis. The representation if made to be disposed of not latter than twelve weeks from the receipt thereof. Petition disposed of accordingly. (F.I. (F.I. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) REBELLO,J.) REBELLO,J.) (S.P. (S.P. (S.P. KUKDAY,J.) KUKDAY,J.) KUKDAY,J.)