1 W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 7668 OF 2011 Ishwar Fattu Rathod Age : 49 Yrs., Occ. Service, At present Agriculture Extension Officer, Panhayat Samiti, Dhadgaon, Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar R/o : 63, Kalpana Nagar, Shahada, Tq. Shahada, Dist. : Nandurbar. ..... PETITIONER V E R S U S 1. The State of Maharashtra Through Assistant Commissioner, Nashik Division, Nashik. 2. Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar. Through its Chief Executive Officer. 3. Agriculture Development Officer Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar, Dist. Nandurbar. 4. Anil Gopal Kagne Age : 43 Yrs., Occ. Service, R/o : Plot No. 12, Gopal Nagar, Dhule Road, Nandurbar, Dist. Nandurbar. ..... RESPONDENTS 2 W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ] Mr. S.U.Choudhari, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.B.Pulkundwar, Addl. Govt. Pleader for State. Mr. Pravin Patil, Advocate for Resp. No. 2. Mr. Mukhedkar, Advocate holding for Mr. M.G.Kochar, Advocate for Resp. No. 4. CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA, J. DATE OF JUDGMENT : 14/12/2011. ORAL JUDGMENT : 1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the learned counsel for the respective parties, taken up for final hearing. 2. The present Respondent no. 4 had filed Appeal before the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik with regard to the seniority list. The present petitioner was added as respondent. However, no notice was issued to the present petitioner and the Appeal came to be decided by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. The Appeal was allowed, wherein it was directed that the present respondent no. 4 be shown senior to the present petitioner. The said order is assailed in the present Writ Petition. 3. Mr. Choudhari, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik has decided the Appeal without even issuing notice to the present petitioner and order adverse to the 3 W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ] interest of the petitioner is passed. The fundamental principles of natural justice have been violated. The petitioner is shown as senior in the seniority list and on erroneous ground, the Appeal has been allowed. 4. Mr. Pravin Patil, the learned counsel for Respondent no. 2 - Zilla Parishad submits that after the order was passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik, the Zilla Parishad has prepared the seniority list. The same is also published. Thereafter, second list is published in January, 2011. No objection was received to that list. In view of that, the petition may not be entertained. 5. Mr. Mukhedkar, the learned counsel for respondent no. 4 submits that in fact the present respondent no. 4 is senior. He was shown as senior right from 1993 to 2006 and thereafter abruptly from 2007 to 2009, the petitioner was shown as senior and the same was challenged before the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. The date of joining of the present respondent no. 4 is earlier in point of time than that of the petitioner. The Divisional Commissioner, Nashik has rightly decided the matter. 6. It is cardinal principle that no adverse order can be passed without hearing the party, against whom the adverse order is to be passed. 4 W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ] In the present case, the order prejudicial to the interest of the petitioner is passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik even without issuing notice to the petitioner. The same would be flagrant violation of the civil jurisprudence. In view of that, I feel it appropriate to afford an opportunity to the petitioner to put forth his case before the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. It is submitted that the seniority list has been prepared as per the order passed by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. As the seniority list is already prepared, the said seniority list shall not be disturbed till the decision is given by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik in the Appeal. The seniority list would be subject to the decision given by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. 7. In the result, I pass the following order : The impugned order is quashed and set aside. The parties are relegated before the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik. . The parties shall appear before the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik on 26/12/2011. The Divisional Commissioner, Nashik shall decide Appeal No. 56 of 2009 filed by the present respondent no. 4 as expeditiously as possible and preferably within the period of two ( 2 ) months from the date of the appearance of the parties. 5 W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ] The seniority list which is published would not be disturbed and the same shall be subject to the decision of the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik in Appeal No. 56 of 2009 i.e. the seniority list would be prepared as per the decision given by the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik after hearing the parties. Till the decision of the Divisional Commissioner, Nashik, the status-quo as on today be maintained interse between the parties in respect of promotion. 8. Rule is accordingly made absolute in above terms. No costs. [ S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J. ] KNP/W.P. 7668.2011 - [ J ]