-
by Admin
07 May 2024 2:49 AM
In a recent judgment, the Bombay High Court upheld the cancellation of appointments of Ramhari Dagadu Shinde, Jagannath Motiram Abhyankar, and Kishor Ramdas Medhe as Members/Chairman of the Maharashtra State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The court ruled that the appointments were made at the pleasure of the government and had no statutory or constitutional recognition. The decision highlights the discretionary power of the government to revoke such appointments and dismisses the petitioners' claims of arbitrariness and discrimination.
In a significant ruling, the Bombay High Court has upheld the cancellation of appointments of Ramhari Dagadu Shinde, Jagannath Motiram Abhyankar, and Kishor Ramdas Medhe as Members/Chairman of the Maharashtra State Commission for Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes. The court's judgment emphasized that these appointments were made at the pleasure of the government and held no statutory or constitutional recognition.
The petitioners had challenged the order dated December 2, 2022, which revoked their appointments to the Commission. They argued that the cancellation was arbitrary and motivated by political considerations, aimed at accommodating supporters and workers of the ruling dispensation. The petitioners contended that their appointments had a tenure of three years, which had not expired, and that the cancellation violated principles of natural justice.
However, the court rejected these arguments, noting that the Commission itself was a non-statutory body and its existence was solely at the discretion of the government. The appointments were made by an executive order, without any competitive process or selection procedure. Therefore, the court held that the petitioners had no fundamental or legal right to the posts and the government had the prerogative to cancel their appointments.
Justice Neela Gokhale, delivering the judgment on behalf of the bench, stated, "The nomination of the Petitioners to the posts in question was also by an executive order of the Government; it, too, can be cancelled by an executive order of the Government. For this reason, the Petitioners have no fundamental or legal right to the posts."
The court further noted that the petitioners had filed multiple petitions seeking similar reliefs on the same grounds, which amounted to an abuse of the legal process. The court expressed its disapproval of such practices, emphasizing the importance of judicial resources and efficiency.
With this ruling, the Bombay High Court has reaffirmed the discretionary power of the government in revoking appointments to non-statutory bodies. The judgment highlights that such appointments serve at the pleasure of the government, and there is no requirement for the government to provide justification or opportunity for a hearing in cases of revocation.
DATE: Reserved on 12th June 2023,
Ramhari Dagadu Shinde VS The State of Maharashtra
[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/Ramhari-Vs-State-Bomb.-HC-20-June-23.pdf"]
