FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGBAD. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office notes, office Memoranda of | coram, appearance, court’s orders |Court’s or Judge’s orders. or directions and Registrar’s orders | WRIT PETITION NO.902/2007 Shri V.H.Dighe,A.G.P.for petitioner-State. Shri V.G.Mete,Adv.for respondent. .... CORAM : NARESH H.PATIL & N.D.DESHPANDE,JJ. DATE : 12/4/2010. 1] Heard. 2] We have perused order passed by the Tribunal and the relevant documents placed on record. Learned A.G.P. Shri Dighe submitted that in the light of the Rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India viz. Civil Engineering Assistant Group-C in the Public Works Department (Recruitment) Rules, 1998, relying on Government Resolution dated 26/11/1997, the Tribunal ought to have rejected the application. The counsel submitted that Tribunal erred in placing reliance on Government Resolution dated 26/11/1997. The Construction Supervisors cannot be treated at par with the Civil Engineering Assistants. 3] Shri V.G.Mete, learned counsel appearing for respondents placed reliance on Government Resolution dated 23/9/2008 and the earlier order passed by the Tribunal in the case of Original Application No.649/2003 dated 12/2/2004. 4] We find that though under the Rules viz. Recruitment Rules, 1998, Construction Supervisors are not considered to be appointed as Civil Engineering Assistants, by issuing Government Resolution as mentioned above, the Government had considered Construction Supervisors to be equal to Civil Engineering Assistants. 5] We do not find any error in the view adopted by the Tribunal. Petition is dismissed. (N.D.DESHPANDE) (NARESH H. PATIL) JUDGE JUDGE umg/wp270-09