UDDHAV DHONDIBA YERKAL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned advocate for the petitioner as also the learned AGP.

(2.) The petitioner has been working as a daily wager with the respondent - forest Department. The Industrial Court by the order dtd. 15/9/2015 had directed him to be regularized pursuant to the Government Resolutions dtd. 31/1/1996 and 16/10/2012. It was also observed that he was not working under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (E.G.S.) and had served for a continuous period of more than five years since the date of initial appointment. The order of the Industrial Court was challenged by the respondents in this Court in Writ Petition No.9755/2016. By the order dtd. 23/1/2017, the petition was partly allowed and a direction was given to the respondents to consider the petitioner's case in accordance with the Government Resolution dtd. 31/1/1996 and to grant regularization on the basis of eligibility and seniority.

(3.) It appears that the petitioner is now aggrieved by the fact that subsequently the respondent No.2 has addressed a communication to the respondent No.1 (Annexure-D) dtd. 21/2/2022, pursuant to the directions of the Industrial Court and this Court. However, while submitting the proposal once against the statistics is provided indicating that the petitioner was serving under the E.G.S. scheme since inception till the year 2009-10. The petitioner now apprehends that in view of such defective proposal, there is every possibility of the respondent No.1 passing an order adverse to him.