1 mss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO. 3557 OF 2006 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2057 OF 2009 RAJENDRA RAMCHANDRA JAMKAR .. PETITIONER Vs. THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER & ORS. RESPONDENTS Mr. R. M. Kolge for the petitioners Mrs. M. P. Thakur, AGP CORAM: SMT. RANJANA DESAI & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED: 10/9/2009 P.C. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties taken up for hearing forthwith. 2 2. The petitioner has inter alia prayed; (a) Rule be issued. Records and proceedings be called for; (b) By suitable writ order or direction of this Hon’ble High Court be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned communication dated 2-9-2005 issued by the Respondent No. 1 for not granting continuation of service since from July, 1986 to the post of Assistant Teacher and to grant seniority to the post of Assistant Teacher since from July 1986 in accordance with the Govt. Resolution dated 11-4-1988 for condonation of break in service since from July 1986 and after condoning the such break in service be pleased to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of “Head Master” through the category of Schedule Caste in accordance with the seniority or to grant time bound promotion after completion of his tenure of service of 12 years to be counted since from 1986 after counting the seniority from June 1986 and other consequential thereof may kindly be granted and petition be allowed accordingly. (c) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this Petition be pleased to kindly stay the operation/implementation/execution of impugned order dated 2-9-2005 passed by the Respondent No. 1 3 under which it has decided not to grant any condonation of break in service, seniority, promotion and time bound promotion etc. (d) Pending the hearing and final disposal of this petition be pleased to kindly decide the proposal dated 24-7-2002 and 13-9-2004 made by the Respondent No. 1 to 3 and direct the Respondent No. 3 accordingly to grant/consider prayer clause in terms of clause (b) as above. (e) Costs be provided for; 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed Civil Application No. 2057 of 2009 for expeditious hearing of the petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is given to respondent 3 to decide the proposals dated 24/7/2000 and 13/9/2004 submitted by the 1st respondent as expeditiously as possible. He submitted that, if such a direction is given he shall not press the other prayers at this stage. 4. In the circumstances of the case, in our opinion, following order will meet the ends of justice; The proposals dated 24/7/2000 and 13/9/2004 submitted by the 1st 4 respondent are directed to be decided by the 3rd respondent within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order by him. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case and the proposals may be decided independently and in accordance with law. Needless to say that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the order passed by the 3rd respondent, he can adopt such remedy as may be available to him in law. The petition as well as civil application are disposed of in the aforestated terms. (Smt. Ranjana Desai, J.) (A. A. Sayed, J.)