1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR Writ Petition No. 3035 of 2007 [Ku. Manda Patruji Barsagade & ors. Vs. State of Mah. & ors.] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. Mr. A.S. Chandurkar, Adv., for petitioners. Mr. S.S. Doifode, AGP for respondent no.1. Mr. G.G. Mishra, Adv., for Respondent No.2. ------ CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND F.M. REIS, JJ. DATE : 20th August, 2009. 1. Heard. 2. Petitioners, who are Auxiliary Nurses- Midwives, are seeking selection against regular posts as per seniority. 3. Learned Adv. Mr. Chandurkar states that as per the settled practice, Seniority List is maintained and depending upon vacancies becoming available, the persons in order of seniority therein are given regular appointment. He states that for the first time on this occasion, a public advertisement has been issued on 11th May, 2007 by respondent no.2-Zilla Parishad and they are contemplating holding of a competitive 2 examination and preparation of a Select List on the basis of performance therein. He further states that this is in violation of a practice being followed for all these years, and also contrary to provisions of Item (x) of Appendix-V of the Maharashtra Zilla Parishads District Services (Recruitment) Rules, 1967. 4. Learned Adv. Mr. Mishra for respondent nos. 2 and 3 and learned AGP for respondent no.1 both rely on Item (x) of Appendix-V of the said Rules, to urge that the procedure being followed is of nomination and such appointments have always been made through open competitive examination. 5. Perusal of Item (x) of Appendix-V of the said Rules clearly shows that it contemplates recruitment to the post of Auxiliary Nurse-Midwife by nomination from amongst the candidates who are mentioned in Clauses (i) and (ii). The petitioners admittedly fall in Clause (ii) stipulated under said Item (x). Thus, the petitioners are entitled to be considered for nomination and their entitlement is being examined through public advertisement and selection process. We do not find any automatic process of making appointment against permanent vacancies in the cadre of Auxiliary Nurse-midwife envisaged in said Recruitment Rules. Hence, in view of this express provision, we are not considering the argument 3 pertaining to the practice being followed since long, as, according to respondents, there was no such practice. 6. We, therefore, do not find any merit in the petition. Writ Petition is dismissed. No costs. Judge Judge |Hedau|