WRIT PETITION NO. 6046/2010. Kirti s/o. Baliram Bodele, aged about 38 years, R/o. Lashkari Bagh, Dr. Ambedkar Colony,...VERSUS...

Transcription

1 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6046/2010 Kirti s/o. Baliram Bodele, aged about 38 years, R/o. Lashkari Bagh, Dr. Ambedkar Colony, Nagpur 17. PETITIONER...VERSUS The State of Maharashtra, through its Secretary, Department of Medical Education and Research, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 2, The Director of Medical Education and Drugs, Saint George Hospital Premises, Dental College Building, Mumbai. 3, The Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Hanuman Nagar, Nagpur. 4. The Collector, Nagpur, District Nagpur. RESPONDENTS Smt. Neeta Jog Advocate, for petitioner. Smt. D.P. Maldhure, AGP, for respondents. CORAM: R. K. DESHPANDE, J. DATE : 9 th JANUARY, ORAL JUDGMENT 1] Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

2 2 consent of the parties. 2] The challenge in this petition is to the judgment and order dated 18 th March, 2010, passed by the learned Member, Industrial Court, Nagpur, in Complaint (ULPN) No. 534/1999. The Industrial Court has by its impugned judgment dismissed the complaint filed by the petitioner claiming promotion to the post of X ray Technician, for granting higher pay scale and challenging the promotion to the other employees given in the post of X ray Technician, excluding the claim of the petitioner. 3] The Industrial Court has recorded the finding that the complainant has failed to establish on the basis of G.R. dated that he was entitled to the benefit of higher scale in the promotional post. It is the further finding recorded that the complainant was doing the clerical work as he was appointed as Record Clerk and the complainant has further failed to establish that he was holding a technical post. The Industrial Court has further held that there is nothing on record to establish that the promotional channel was available for the post of Record Clerk to the post of X ray Technician and hence, the claim for promotion was

3 3 also not substantiated. In respect of the last challenge to the promotion of other candidates, it has been held that the complainant has failed to prove that the persons promoted to the post of X ray Technician were similarly situated. 4] With the assistance of the learned counsel for the petitioner, I have gone through the entire complaint. The basic claim in the complaint is for promotion to the post of X ray Technician. It is not the case of the petitioner in the complaint that he was denied benefits available in the post of Record Clerk, which he was holding. Smt. Jog, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has relied upon the document at Exh. 60, dated , which is a recommendation by the Dean, Medical College, Nagour, to the Director, Medical Education, whereby the proposal was submitted for promotion of the petitioner to the post of X ray Technician. She has also relied upon the pay slips at Exh. 64 to 67 in respect of her contention that the post of Record Clerk is a technical post as there is reference in the pay slip regarding the post of Record Clerk being technical. She has also relied upon the orders of appointment at Exh. 44 to 48, showing that the petitioner was appointed on temporary basis on a technical post. She does

4 4 not dispute that the petitioner has not produced on record any document to show that the promotional channel was available from the post of Record Clerk to the post of X ray Technician. 5] Simply because there are some recommendations made by the Dean, Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur, to the Director of Medical Education regarding promotion to the petitioner to the post of X ray Technician, that would not confer upon the petitioner any right to get promotion to the post of X ray Technician. The posts of X ray Technician being technical in nature, the recruitment to the same has to be governed by the criteria to be specified by framing Rules. Undisputedly, there are no Rules placed on record by the petitioner showing that the promotional channel was available from the post of Record Clerk to the post of X ray Technician on the basis of seniority cum merit or that the petitioner was possessing necessary qualification for promotion to the said post. In view of this, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the Industrial Court that the complainant has failed to establish the claim for promotion to the post of X ray Technician. 6] Undisputedly, there is no claim made in the complaint

5 that the petitioner has been denied any benefits available for the 5 post of Record Clerk. The reference to grant of benefit in the complaint is for promotional post of X ray technician. Since the petitioner has failed to establish his claim for promotion to the post of X ray Technician, no fault can be found with the findings recorded by the Industrial Court rejecting the claim of the petitioner for grant of higher scale in next promotional post. 7] Since the petitioner has failed to establish his claim for promotion to the post of X ray technician, he had no locus to challenge the appointment or recruitment of other persons in the post of X ray Technician. Hence, no fault can be found with the view taken by the Industrial Court. In the result, there is no substance in the petition. The same is dismissed. No orders as to costs Rvjalit JUDGE