NITIN PANDURANG SHEJWAL A Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of parties taken up for final hearing.

(2.) By these petitions, petitioners challenge the Order dated 20 th December, 2022 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai (Tribunal) in Original Application Nos.775 of 2022, 776 of 2022, 777 of 2022, 778 of 2022, 779 of 2022, 793 of 2022, 796 of 2022 and 830 of 2022 by which the Tribunal has proceeded to recall its earlier Judgment and Order dtd. 11/4/2022 passed in Original Application Nos. 144 of 2022, 145 of 2022, 146 of 2022, 167 of 2022, 203 of 2022, 300 of 2022, 301 of 2022, 321 of 2022. The petitioners also challenge common Order dtd. 22/12/2022 passed in both sets of Original Applications (OA No.775/2022 and other connected OAs and OA No.144 of 2022 and other connected OAs) to a larger Bench.

(3.) Brief facts of the case are that the recruitment process for the post of Police Constable (Driver) was initiated by the Additional Director General of Police, (M.S), Mumbai vide Advertisement dtd. 30/11/2019. The recruitment process was apparently to be conducted in respect of the separate Units / Districts. The Applicants in Original Application No.144 of 2022 and other connected OAs filled up forms in respect of multiple Units / Districts and also appeared for multiple examinations. Though their names were included in the merit list, the same were subsequently deleted from the revised merit list for the reason of their participation in selection process in more than one Unit/District. Challenging deletion of their names from the revised merit list, Original Application Nos.144 of 2022, 145 of 2022, 146 of 2022, 167 of 2022, 203 of 2022, 300 of 2022, 301 of 2022, 321 of 2022 were instituted by such candidates before the Tribunal. In those Original Applications, though relief was sought for inclusion of their names in the merit list and consequential appointment to the post of Police Constable (Driver), the candidates that were likely to be affected by grant of such reliefs were not impleaded as parties to those Original Applications.