Try out our Premium Member services: Virtual Legal Assistant, Query Alert Service and an ad-free experience. Free for one month and pay only if you like it.
kvm 1 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 3608 OF 2010 Pradeep Ganpatrao Karad, ) Age : 28 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o : Punam Arcade, N-4, CIDCO, ) Aurangabad ) ..... Petitioner Versus 1. State of Maharashtra, ) Through its Secretary, ) Department of Environment and Forest, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai ) 2. The Chairman, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd and ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 3. The Member Secretary, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd and ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 4. Shri Sandip Manohar Motegaonkar, ) Age : 34 years, Occ.:Service, ) R/o : Water Pollution Abatement Engineer) Section, 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, ) Sion-Matunga Scheme Road No.8, ) Near Sion Circle, Sion, Mumbai - 400 022) 5. Shri Bhagwan Manikrao Makhnikar, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 2 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o : Sub Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Dev Towers, Opp. Tahsil Office, ) Latur, District Latur - 413512. ) 6. Shri Ajitkumar Tukaram Khude, ) Age : 32 years, Occu. : Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, New Mumbai, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 7th Floor, Sector 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai. ) 7. Shri Rahul Hanmantrao Nimbalkar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) th Municipal Corporation Building, 4 Floor) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai - 400 001 ) 8. Shri Kiran Gangadhar Malbhage, ) Age : 34 years, Occ. : Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Tarapur - 1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) MIDC Office Building, Bhoisar Station, ) Post Taps, Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 9. Shri Rajaram Kerba Injulkar, ) Age : 30 years, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Pimpri Chinchwad) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune - 411 003 ) 10. Shri Rajkumar Govindrao Pawale, ) Name deleted ) 11. Shri Rajesh Dharma Nandgaonkar, ) Age : 33 years, Occ.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 3 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o : Sub Regional Office, Mumbai - 4, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) th Municipal Corporation Building, 4 Floor,) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai - 400 001. ) 12. Saif Dilawar Naikwadi, ) Name deleted ) 13. Rohidas Radhakishan Matkar, ) Age : 31 years, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-2,) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryawaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, ) Aurangabad - 431210 ) 14. Sandip Baburao Shinde, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o.: Sub Regional Office, Chiplun, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Parkar Complex, 1st Floor, Behind Nagar ) Parishad Office, Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri ) 15. Pradip Anandrao Khuspe, ) Age : 32 years, Occu. : Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Raigad - 1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 6th Floor, Sector - 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai. ) 16. Swapnil Vasant Lingade, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chandrapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Brij Niwas, Near Janata School, ) Back to Jalshuddhikaran Tank, ) Civil Line, Chandrapur - 442 401. ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 4 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 17. Mahesh Balbhimrao Chavan, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Head Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai - 400022 ) 18. Nandkumar Nivrutirao Lomate, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Solapur , ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 4/B, Bali Block Civil Line, ) Opp.Govt.Milk Scheme, Sat Rasta, ) Solapur - 413003 ) 19. Rajesh Govindrao Auti, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad-431210) 20. Sanjay Popatrao Kavare, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Tarapur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) MIDC Office Building, Bhoisar Station, ) Post Taps, Tarapur, Dist.Thane ) 21. Sunil Ashokrao Sonkambale, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Raigad-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 6th Floor, Sector - 11, ) CBD, Belapur, New Mumbai. ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 5 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 22. Yogesh Vishwanath Gore, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Mumbai -2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Municipal) Market Building, 4th Floor, Mata Ramabai) Ambedkar Road, Mumbai - 400001 ) 23. Yogesh Ashok Deshmukh, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kolhapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan Building, Near Collectorate) Office, Kolhapur - 416002 ) 24. Arvind Sakharam Dhapate, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kolhapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan Building, Near Collectorate) Office, Kolhapur - 416002 ) 25. Sushilkumar Balkrishna Shinde, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-2) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad ) 26. Vishwajeet Vikram Sorge, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad ) 27. Bajirao Vijay Malvekar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 6 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad ) 28. Sachin Ankush Jadhav, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Solapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 4/B, Bali Block, Civil Line, ) Opp. Govt. Milk Scheme, Sat Rasta, ) Solapur ) 29. Dayeshwar Vishram Tuljapurkar, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Raigad-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 6th Floor, Sector - 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai ) 30. Raviraj Bhausaheb Patil, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kolhapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan Building, ) Near Collectorate Office, Kolhapur-416002) 31. Sharad Vasantrao Pawar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai ) 32. Ankush Ramchandra Patil, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 7 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax ) Office, Civil Line, Nagpur ) 33. Santoshkumar Limbraj Chavan, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kalyan-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Siddhvinayak Sankul, 3rd & 4th Floor, ) Station Road, Kalyan (West) ) 34. Santosh Dattatraya Mohare, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad ) 35. Umesh Shatrughanrao Jadhav, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Environment Information Centre, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion Mumbai ) 36. Vinod Dharmapal Shukla, ) Age : 41 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad ) 37. Pramod Shivaji Doke, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Pune-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:28 ::: kvm 8 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 38. Pradeep Chandrakant Bhalke, ) Name deleted ) 39. Shivanand Vyankatrao Baswade, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Pimpri Chinchwad) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune-411 003 ) 40. Uday Dilip Yadav, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kalyan-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Siddhvinayak Sankul, 3rd & 4th Floor, ) Station Road, Kalyan (West) ) 41. Ajit Ramdasrao Suryawanshi, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Aurangabad-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Paryavaran Bhavan, A-4/1, MIDC Area, ) Chikalthana, Near Seth Nandlal Dhoot ) Hospital, Jalna Road, Aurangabad-431210) 42. Abhijit Sundarlal Lohiya, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chandrapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Brij Niwas, Near Janata School, ) Back to Jalshuddhikaran Tank, ) Civil Line, Chandrapur - 442401 ) 43. Sangram Sanjay Nimbalkar, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Coordination Section, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 9 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Sion, Mumbai ) 44. Sandip Raghunath Patil, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Sangali, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 300/2, Udyog Bhavan, Near Govt.Rest House,) Vishrambagh, Sangali ) 45. Nilesh Govind Morankar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chiplun, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Parkar Complex, 1st Floor, Behind Nagar ) Parishad Office, Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri ) 46. Dattatraya Dashrath Gavali, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Pune-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune-411003 ) 47. Vikram Harishchandra Mane, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Raigad-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 7th Floor, Sector 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai ) 48. Nivruti Ramdas Lokhande, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Solapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 4/B, Bali Block, Civil Line, Opp.Govt. ) Milk Scheme, Sat Rasta, Solapur-413003 ) 49. Abhijit Ramling Kasabe, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Pune-2, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 10 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune - 411003 ) 50. Prakash Sopan Tate, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai ) 51. Anirudha Prabhakar Varale, ) Age : 36 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, New Mumbai-1) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) th Municipal Corporation Building, 4 Floor,) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai - 400001 ) 52. Mahendra Mahadeo Pattebahadur, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Jalgaon-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Late Shri Bhikamchand Jain Municipal ) Market Building, Hall No.A, 3rd Floor, ) Jalgaon - 425001 ) 53. Nandkumar Babaji Salve, ) Name deleted 54. Prabhakar Nagnath Vavade, ) Age : 38 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chandrapur, ) Brij Niwas, Near Janata School, ) Back of Jal Shuddhikaran Tank, Civil Line,) Chandrapur-442401. ) 55. Pramod Raghunath Lone, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 11 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Tarapur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) MIDC Office Building, Bhoisar Station, ) Post Taps, Tarapur, Dist. Thane. ) 56. Sanjay Pralhad Pantawane, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Kalyan-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Siddhivinayak Sankul, 3rd & 4th Floor, ) Station Road, Kalyan (West) ) 57. Dineshbhai Bhikabhai Vasava, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Nashik, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 1st Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near ITI, Satpur, Nashik - 422007 ) 58. Vijaykumar Narayanrao Rapole, ) Age : 39 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Nanded, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Lahoti Complex, 2nd Floor, Near Shivaji Statue, ) Vajirabad, Nanded - 431601 ) 59. Jaiprakash Babu Bhusar, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chiplun, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Parkar Complex, 1st Floor, Behind Nagar ) Parishad Office, Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri ) 60. Namdeo Pandurang Darshewad, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Chiplun, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Parkar Complex, 1st Floor, Behind Nagar ) Parishad Office, Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 12 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 61. Tarachand Annaji Thakare, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Jalgaon-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Late Shri Bhikamchand Jain Municipal ) Market Building, Hall No.A, 3rd Floor, ) Jalgaon-425001 ) 62. Jitendra Hukumchand Purate, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Bhandara, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 63. Nitin Dinkar Chaudhari, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Akola, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Near Bharatiya State Bank (Treasury Branch)) Shastri Nagar, Akola - 444005 ) 64. Dinesh Laxman Marbhal, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Tarapur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) MIDC Office Building, Bhoisar Station, ) Post Taps, Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 65. Sandip Vasant Sonawane, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Sub Regional Office, Amravati-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 18/25, Ashirvad Building, Daffrin Hospital Road,) Shrikrishna Peth, Amravati - 4444601 ) 66. Amit Laxman Late, ) Name deleted ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 13 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 67. Samir Sambhaji Vastre, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Pimpri Chinchwad) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune-411003 ) 68. Vishalsing Ravindrasing Rajput, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Tarapur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) MIDC Office Building, Bhoisar Station, ) Post Taps, Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 69. Pratap Mahadeo Gajre, ) Name deleted ) 70. Amar Akaram Katkar, ) Name deleted ) 71. Sarjerao Jaisng Bhoi, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax ) Office, Civil Lines, Nagpur ) 72. Utkarsha Ramesh Singare, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) th Municipal Corporation Building, 4 Floor) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai - 400001 ) 73. Ajay Anandrao Khamkar, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 14 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Manjunath Major Commercial Building, ) 531, Sadar Bazar, Opp. Science College, ) Satara-415002 ) 74. Santosh Dnyanoba Dahiphale, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Taloja, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 7th Floor, Sector 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai ) 75. Vishal Vyankatrao Mundhe, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Ahmednagar, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Bharat Timber, 1st Floor, Tilak Road, ) Opp. Sanket Hotel, Ahmednagar-414001 ) 76. Vyankat Govindrao Bhatane, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, New Mumbai-1,) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 7th Floor, Sector 11, ) CBD, Belapur, New Mumbai ) 77. Nandkishor Pandurang Patil, ) Age : 36 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Kalyan-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Siddhivinayak Sankul, 3rd & 4th Floor, ) Station Road, Kalyan (West) ) 78. Nilesh Jijabrao Patil, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax ) Office, Civil Line, Nagpur ) 79. Anand Sukhdeo Gurav, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 15 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Name deleted ) 80. Jayant Mahadeo Doke, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Salex Tax ) Office, Civil Line, Nagpur ) 81. Ketan Ashok Patil, ) Age : 38 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Mahad, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Samaik Suvidha Kendra Building, MIDC,) Mahad, Dist.Raigad - 402309. ) 82. Gajanan Shrirang Pawar, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Mumbai-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) Municipal Corporation Building, ) th 4 Floor, Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road,) Mumbai - 400001. ) 83. Rajendra Pandurang Suryawanshi, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nashik, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 1st Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near ITI, Satpur, Nashik - 422007 ) 84. Ulhas Uttamrao Kanade, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax ) Office, Civil Line, Nagpur. ) 85. Sagar Rambhau Varekar, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 16 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, PCI-3, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai ) 86. Darshan Vishnudas Mhatre, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Ahmednagar, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Bharat Timber, 1st Floor, Tilak Road, ) Opp.Sanket Hotel, Ahmednagar - 414001 ) 87. Vinod Ramkrushna Pawale, ) Name deleted ) 88. Milind Ravindra Thakur, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Ahmednagar, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Bharat Timber, 1st Floor, Tilak Road, ) Opp.Sanket Hotel, Ahmednagar-414001 ) 89. Jaydip Jagannath Kumbhar, ) Age : 35 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Akola, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Near Bharatiya State Bank (Treasury Branch) Shastri Nagar, Akola - 444005 ) 90. Samir Yashwant Hundalekar, ) Age : 37 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 91. Manoj Narayan Watane, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 17 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 92. Surendra Gajananrao Karandkar, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 93. Yogesh Dilip Patil, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 94. Manish Arun Mahajan, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 95. Suvarna Baburao Gaikwad, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Dev Towers, Opp.Tahsil Office, Latur, ) District Latur - 413512 ) 96. Aruna Chandrakant Jadhav, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Pune-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 18 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 97. Renuka Ashok Kulkarni, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Pune-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune ) 98. Shubhangi Ramesh Patankar, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, New Mumbai-2,) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 7th Floor, Sector 11, ) CBD Belapur, New Mumbai ) 99. Sujata Madhukar Magar, ) Age : 28 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Pune-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 2nd Floor, Jog Centre, Mumbai-Pune Road,) Wakadewadi, Pune ) 100. Priyashri Deepakrao Deshmukh, ) Age : 33 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nagpur-2, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax Office,) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 101. Deepali Damodharrao Lokhande, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nashik, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 1st Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near ITI, Satpur, Nashik-422 007 ) 102. Deepali Manohar Tayade, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 19 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Municipal Corporation Building, ) th 4 Floor, Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road,) Mumbai - 400001 ) 103. Varsha Ambadas Kadam, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, Kolhapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan Building, ) Near Collectorate Office, Kolhapur - 416002) 104. Snehal Madhavrao Kose, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, PCI-3, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai. ) 105. Rekha Murari Togare, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Solapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 4/B, Bali Block, Civil Line, ) Opp. Govt. Milk Scheme, Sat Rasta, ) Solapur - 413 003 ) 106. Seema Pandharinath Salve, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nashik, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 1st Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near ITI, Satpur, Nashik-422 007 ) 107. Rupali Madhukar Kambale, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, PCI-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kalpataru Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 20 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Sion, Mumbai. ) 108. Shilpa Amol Borade, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Thane-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Plot No.P-30, 5th Floor, Office Complex ) Building, Mulund Check Naka, Thane ) 109. Deepali Ashok Tambe, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, Nashik, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 1st Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near ITI, Satpur, Nashik-422 007 ) 110. Smita Dattatray Sanap, ) Age : 32 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office, Amravati, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 18/25, Ashirvad Building, ) Daffrin Hospital Road, Shrikrishna Peth, ) Amravati - 444601 ) 111. Jyoti Shivaji Sutar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Nanded, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Lahoti Complex, 2nd Floor, ) Near Shivaji Statue, Vajirabad, ) Nanded - 431 601. ) 112. Punam Sunil Poyarekar, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Amravati-1, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 18/25, Ashirvad Building, ) Daffrin Hospital Road, Shrikrishna Peth,) Amravati - 444601. ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 21 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 113. Sushma Sangram Kumbhar, ) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Sub Regional Office, Kolhapur, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan Building, ) Near Collectorate Office, Kolhapur - 416002) 114. Rutika Sachin Dalvi, ) Age : 29 years, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Water Pollution Abetment Engineer,) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) 3rd Floor, Kolhapur Point, Sion Matunga ) Scheme Road No.8, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion, Mumbai ) 115. Ravindra S/o Ankush Jadhav, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) As Field Officer at Sub-Regional Office, ) Royal Konark Residency, Jalan Nagar, ) Paithan Road, Aurangabad ) 116. Vishal S/o Gajanan Jadhav, ) Age : 34 years, Occu.: Service, ) As Field Officer, ) R/o : At present Amravati ) 117. Dr.Kalyani Anandrao Zadpide, ) Age : 40 years, Occu.: Service as ) Field Officer, ) R/o : C/o. Shri R.J.Naik, ) Plot No.E-26, N-4, CIDCO, Aurangabad ) 118. Indrajeet S/o Gajananrao Deshmukh,) Age : 31 years, Occu.: Service as ) Field Officer, ) R/o : Sahakar Surbhi, ) Swami Vivekanand Marg, ) Near Ahilya Mangal Karyalaya, ) Bapatwadi, Amravati ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 22 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 119. Avishnash S/o Vaijnathrao Kadle, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service as ) Field Officer, ) R/o : 22-B, Dipti's Green View Apartment,) Near Sarva Sakshi Ganesh Mandir, ) Behind Mahaveer College, Kolhapur ) 120. Smt.Ujjwala Tukaram Gude, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.: Service as ) Field Officer, ) R/o : Room No.304, B-Wing, B-40, ) RMG Unit No.10, CHS, Gokuldham, ) Goregaon (E), Mumbai - 63 ) ..... Respondents Mr. P.D.Bachate for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.G.Gujarathi, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Mr.Shrihari Aney, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.A.S.Deshpande for the Respondent no.2. Ms.Pradnya Talekar for the Respondent nos. 4 to 9, 11, 13 to 19, 21 to 27, 29 to 52, 54 to 67, 69, 71 to 78, 80 to 114. Mr.N.T.Tribhuwan for the Respondent nos. 6 and 8. Mr.S.D.Joshi for the Intervenor (respondent nos. 115 to 120). ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7841 OF 2009 Swapnil S/o. Bhaskarrao Nikam, ) Age : 30 years, Occupation : Nil, ) At present Unemployed, resident of ) 73, 'Pranav' Mahajan Colony, N-2,CIDCO) Aurangabad, Dist. Aurangabad ) ..... Petitioner Versus ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 23 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 1. The State of Maharashtra, ) Through Secretary, ) Environment & Pollution Control Department, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 ) 2. The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board,) Through its Member Secretary, ) Office at : Kalpataru Point, 2/3/4 Floor ) Opp. Cine Planet, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion (East), Mumbai - 400 022 ) 3. Shashikant S/o Ramrao Patil, ) Age :- Major, ) R/O :- C/o. Mah. Pollution Control Board,) Siddhivinayak Sankul, 3rd & 4th Floor, ) Station Road, Kalyan (West), Dist.Thane ) 4. Ravindra S/o Govind Kshirsagar, ) Age :- Major, ) R/o. C/o. Mah. Pollution Control Board, ) Udyog Bhavan, 6th Floor, Near Sale Tax ) Office, Civil Lane, Nagpur - 440 001 ) 5. Manohar S/o Rustam Wakale, ) Age :- Major, ) R/o. C/o. Mah. Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 6th Floor, Sector 11, ) C.B.D.Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 6. Pankaj S/o Bhimrao Bhawane, ) Age :- Major, ) R/o. C/o. Mah. Pollution Control Board, ) Raigad Bhavan, 6th Floor, Sector 11, ) C.B.D.Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 7. Shri Gajanan S/o Damodar Khadakikar,) Age :- 27 yrs, Occu :- Service, ) R/o. C/o. Mah. Pollution Control Board, ) Udhyog Bhawan, First Floor, Trimbak Road,) Near I T I Satpur, Nashik ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 24 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 8. Mahesh S/o Nagshetty Chalwade, ) Age :- Major, ) R/o :- "Sahakar-Surbhai", Bapatwadi, ) Near Vivekanand Colony, Amravati ) ..... Respondents Mr. S.S.Dambe for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.G.Gujarathi, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Mr.Shrihari Aney, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.A.S.Deshpande for the Respondent no.2. Mr.S.S.Thombre for the Respondent no.3. Mr.V.I.Dixit, Senior Advocate with Mr.S.S.Pawar for the Respondent nos. 4 to 8. ALONGWITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11152 OF 2013 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 7841 OF 2009 Jeevansing s/o Veersingh Rajput, ) Age : 30 years, Occu : Nil, ) R/o Kobapur, Tq. Gangapur ) Dist. Aurangabad ) ..... Applicant Versus 1. Swapnil S/o. Bhaskarrao Nikam, ) Age : 30 years, Occupation : Nil, ) R/o 73, Pranav Mahajan Colony, ) N-2,CIDCO, Aurangabad ) 2. The State of Maharashtra, ) Through its Secretary, ) Environment & Pollution Department, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 25 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 3. The Maharashtra Pollution Control Board,) Through its Member Secretary, ) Office at Kalpataru Point, 2/3/4 Floor ) Opp. Cine Planet, Near Sion Circle, ) Sion (East), Mumbai - 400 022 ) 4. Ravindra S/o Govindrao Kshirsagar, ) Age :- Major, Occu : Service, ) R/o. Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) Udyog Bhawan, 6th Floor, Near Sales Tax ) Office, Civil Lane, Nagpur ) 5. Manohar S/o Rustum Wakle, ) Age :- Major, Occu : Service, ) R/o. Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) Raigad Bhawan, 7th Floor, Sector 2, ) C.B.D.Belapur, New Mumbai ) 6. Pankaj S/o Bhimrao Bawane, ) Age :- Major, Occu : Service, ) R/o Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) Raigad Bhawan, 7th Floor, Sector-2, ) C.B.D.Belapur, New Mumbai ) 7. Gajanan Damodarrao Khadakikar, ) Age : Major, Occu :- Service, ) R/o.Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) st Udyog Bhawan, 1 Floor, Trimbak Road, ) Near I.T.I. Satpur, Nashik ) 8. Mahesh Nagshetty Chalwa, ) Age :- Major, Occu : Service, ) R/o Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) 18/25, Ashirwad Building, ) Daffrin Hospital Road, ) Shrikrishna Peth, Amrawati ) 9. Shashikant Ramrao Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu : Service, ) R/o Regional Office, M.P.C.B., ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 26 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc SRO, Kalyan - 1, Siddhivinayak Sankul ) 3rd & 4th Floor, Station Road, ) Kalyan (West) Mumbai ) ..... Respondents Mr. S.G.Jadhavar for the Applicant. Mr.S.S.Dambe for the Respondent no.1. ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7577 OF 2009 Mahesh Sampatrao Rakh, ) Age : 39 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o : N-4, CIDCO, Aurangabad ) ..... Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, ) Through Member Secretary, ) Department of Environment and Forest, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai ) 2. The Chairman, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd and ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 3. Maharashtra Pollution Control Board,) Through the Member Secretary, ) rd Having office at "Kalpataru", 3 and ) th 4 Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 4. Vishalsing S/o Ravindrasing Rajput ) Age - 35 years, Occu - Jr. Scientific Assistant) R/o Regional Laboratory Maharashtra ) Pollution Control Board, Thane ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 27 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Tq. & Dist. Thane ) 5. Sanjay Popatrao Kawre ) Age - 29 years, Occu - Jr. Scientific Assistant) R/o Regional Laboratory Maharashtra ) Pollution Control Board, MAHAPA ) New Mumbai ) 6. Rajkumar s/o Govindrao Pawale ) Age - 38 years, Occu - Nil ) Through the Member Secretary, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd and ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 7. Vinod s/o Dharmapal Shukla ) Age - 38 years, Occu - Nil ) Through the Member Secretary, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd and ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 8. Pramod s/o Prabhakar Nandushekhar) Age - 36 years, Occu - Nil ) Through the Member Secretary, ) rd Having office at "Kalpataru", 3 and ) th 4 Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) ..... Respondents Mr. A.V.Indrale-Patil for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.G.Gujarathi, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Mr.Shrihari Aney, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.A.S.Deshpande for the Respondent no.3. Ms.Pradnya Talekar for the Respondent nos. 5, 7 and 9 to 18. ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 28 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Mr.N.T.Tribhuwan for the Respondent no.4. Mr.S.D.Joshi for the Intervenor. ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7730 OF 2009 1. Babasaheb Navnath Dhakane, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o, Eknath Nagar, Aurangabad, ) Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad ) 2. Sandeep Bhagwanrao Mundhe, ) Age : 28 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o, Vidya Nagar, Aurangabad, ) Tq. & Dist. Aurangabad ) 3. Anil Chudaman Ranvir, ) Age : 30 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o, Purna Dist. Parbhani ) At present Residing at ) Suyog Apartment, E-61, Sector 3, ) Kharghar, New Mumbai ) ..... Petitioners Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, ) Through its Secretary, ) Department of Environment & Forest, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 ) 2. The Chairman, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Having office at "Kalpataru", 3rd & ) 4th Floor, Opposite Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) 3. Member Secretary, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 29 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Having its office at "Kalpataru", 3rd & ) 4th Floor, Opp.Cine Planet, ) Sion-Matonga Scheme Road, ) Sion (E), Mumbai ) (Copies of Respondent No.1 to 3 to be ) served through office of Govt. Pleader, ) Bombay High Court, Bench at ) Aurangabad ) 4. Shri Sandip Manohar Motegaonkar, ) Age : Major, Occ.:Service, ) R/o : Pollution Cntrol Engineers Division,) Mumbai Kalpataru Point, ) Sion (East) Mumbai - 400 022 ) 5. Shri Bhagwan Manikrao Makhnikar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control) Latur Deo Towers, Latur. ) 6. Shri Ajitkumar Tukaram Khude, ) Age : Major, Occu. : Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office, ) Pollution Control, Navi Mumbai -3, ) Raigad Bhavan, Sector-2, ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai. ) 7. Shri Rahul Hanmantrao Nimbalkar, ) Age : Major, Occu.:Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office, ) Pollution Control, Mumbai -3, ) Bld. of Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, ) Mandai, 4th Floor, ) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai - 400 001 ) 8. Shri Kiran Gangadhar Malbhage, ) Age : Major, Occ. : Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur - 1, M.I.D.C. Office Building, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 30 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 9. Shri Rajaram Keraba Injulkar, ) Age : Major, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pimpari Chinchwad, Jog Center, ) Wakdewadi, Pune ) 10. Shri Rajkumar Govindrao Pawale, ) Age : Major, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chandrapur, Brij-Nivas, Civil Line, ) Chandrapur. ) 11. Shri Rajesh Dharma Nandgaonkar, ) Age : Major, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Mumbai-4, Bld.of Shri Chatrapati Shivaji) Maharaj Mandai, 4th Floor, ) Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road, ) Mumbai. ) 12. Saif Dilawar Naikwadi, ) Age : Major, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Satara, Manjunath Major Commercial ) Building, Sadar Bazar, Satara. ) 13. Shri Rohidas Radhakishan Matkar, ) Age : Major, Occ.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-2, Pollution Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad - 431210 ) 14. Shri Sandip Baburao Shinde, ) Age : Major, Occu.:Service, ) R/o.: Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chiplun, Parkar Complex, Chiplun, ) Dist.Ratnagiri ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 31 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 15. Shri Pradip Anandrao Khuspe, ) Age : Major, Occu. : Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Raigad -1, Raigadbhavan, Sector-2, ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai. ) 16. Shri Swapnil Vasant Lingade, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chandrapur, Brij-Nivas, ) Civil Line, Chandrapur. ) 17. Shri Mahesh Balbhimrao Chavan, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Pollution Control Execution ) Division - 3, ) Mah. Pollution Control Board, Division, ) Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, Near Sion Circle,) East, Mumbai - 400022 ) 18. Shri Nandkumar Nivrutirao Lomte, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Solapur , ) 4/B, Civil Line, Sat Road, ) Solapur - 431210 ) 19. Shri Dr.Rajesh Govindrao Auti, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-1, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, Aurangabad) 20. Shri Sanjay Popatrao Kabare, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur-1, M.I.D.C. Office Building, ) Tarapur ) 21. Shri Sunil Ashokrao Sonkamble, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 32 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Raigad-2, Raigad Bhavan, Sector - 2, ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai. ) 22. Shri Yogesh Vishwanathrao Gore, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Mumbai-2, Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Mandai Building, 4th Floor, Mata Ramabai) Ambedkar, Mumbai - 400001 ) 23. Shri Yogesh Ashokrao Deshmukh, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Kolhapur, Udyogbhavan Building, ) Kolhapur ) 24. Shri Arvind Sakharam Dhapate, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Kolhapur Udyogbhavan Building, ) Kolhapur ) 25. Shri Sushilkumar Balkrushna Shinde,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad - 2, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad ) 26. Shri Vishwajit Vikram Sorge, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad -1, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad ) 27. Shri Bajirao Vijay Malvekar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 33 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-1, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad ) 28. Shri Sachin Ankush Jadhav, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Solapur, 4/B, Civil Line, Satrasta, ) Solapur - 413003 ) 29. Shri Dargeshwar Vishram Tuljapurkar,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Raigad - 1, Raigadbhavan, Sector - 2, ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 30. Shri Raviraj Bhausaheb Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Kolhapur, Udyogbhavan Building, ) Kolhapur ) 31. Shri Sharad Vasantrao Pawar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, ) Mah.Pollution Control Board, ) Headoffice, Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, ) Near Sion Circle, East Mumbai ) 32. Shri Ankush Ramchandra Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur - 1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, ) Nagpur ) 33. Shri Santoshkumar Limbraj Chavan,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Kalyan-1, Siddhvinayak Sankul, ) Kalyan (West), Dist. Thane ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 34 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 34. Shri Santosh Dattatraya Mohare, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-1, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad ) 35. Shri Umesh Shatrughanrao Jadhav, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Environment Information Centre, ) Mah.Pollution Control Board, ) rd Kalpataru Point, 3 Floor, Near Sion Circle,) East Mumbai - 400022 ) 36. Shri Vinod Dhampal Shukla, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-1, Environment Bhavan, A-4/1,) M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, Aurangabad ) 37. Shri Pramod Shivaji Doke, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pune-1, Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) 38. Shri Pradeep Chandrakant Bhalke, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chandrapur ) 39. Shri Shivanand Vyankatrao Baswade,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pimpri Chinchwad, Jog Center, ) Wakdewadi, Pune ) 40. Shri Uday Dilip Yadav, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:29 ::: kvm 35 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Kalyan-2, Siddhvinayak Sankul, ) Kalyan West, Dist. Thane ) 41. Shri Ajit Ramdasrao Suryawanshi, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Aurangabad-1, Environment Bhavan, ) A-4/1, M.I.D.C. Chikhalthana, ) Aurangabad ) 42. Shri Abhijit Sundarlal Lohiya, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chandrapur, Brij-Niwas, ) Civil Line, Chandrapur ) 43. Shri Sangram Sanjay Nimbalkar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Mah.Pollution Control Division, ) Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, ) Near Sion Circle, Sion (East), ) Mumbai - 400022 ) 44. Shri Sandip Raghunath Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Sangli, 300/2, Udyogbhavan, ) Vishrambag, Sangali ) 45. Shri Nilesh Govind Morankar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chiplun, Parkar Complex, ) Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri ) 46. Shri Dattatraya Dashrath Gavali, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pune-2, Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 36 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 47. Shri Vikram Harishchandra Mane, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Raigad-1, Raigad Bhavan, Sector-2 , ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 48. Shri Nivrutti Ramdas Lokhande, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Solapur, 4/B, Civil Line, Satrasta, ) Solapur-413003 ) 49. Shri Abhijit Ramling Kasabe, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pune-2, Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) 50. Shri Prakash Sopan Tathe, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Regional Officer, Pollution Control,) Main Office, Mah.Pollution Control Board,) Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, Near Sion Circle,) Sion East, Mumbai ) 51. Shri Anirudhha Prabhakar Varale, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Navi Mumbai-1, Raigad Bhavan, ) C.B.D.Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 52. Shri Mahendra Mahadeo Pattebahadur,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Jalgaon-1, Late Bhikamchand Jain Municipal) Market Building, Jalgaon ) 53. Shri Nandkumar Babaji Salve, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Sangali, 300/2, Udyog Bhavan, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 37 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Vishram Bagh, Sangali ) 54. Shri Prabhakar Nagnath Wavde, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Chandrapur, Bri-Nivas, ) Civil Line, Chandrapur ) 55. Shri Pramod Raghunath Lone, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur-1, M.I.D.C. Office Building, ) Tarapur, Mumbai. ) 56. Shri Sanjay Pralhad Pantawane, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Regional Office, Pollution Control, ) Kalyan, Siddhivinayak Sankul, ) Kalyan (W), Thane ) 57. Shri Dineshbhai Bhikabhai Vasava, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nashik, Udyogbhavan, Tryambak Road, ) Nashik ) 58. Shri Vijaykumar Narayanrao Rapole,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nanded, Lahoti Complex, Vazirabad, Nanded) 59. Shri Jaiprakash Babu Bhusar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Officer, Pollution Control,) Chiplun, Parkar Complex, ) Chiplun, Dist.- Ratnagiri ) 60. Shri Namdeo Pandurang Darsewad, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 38 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Chiplun, Parkar Complex, Chiplun, Dist.Ratnagiri) 61. Shri Tarachand Annaji Thakare, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Jalgaon-2, Late Bhikamchand Jain ) Municipal Market Building, Jalgaon ) 62. Shri Jitendra Hukumchand Purate, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Bhandara, Pethakar Building, ) Sant Tukdoji Maharaj Road, ) Near Life Insurance Office, Bhandara ) 63. Shri Nitin Dinkar Choudhary, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Akola, Near State Bank, Shastri Nagar, ) Akola ) 64. Shri Dinesh Laxman Marbhal, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur, M.I.D.C. Office Building, ) Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 65. Shri Sandip Vasant Sonawane, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o. : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Amravati-2, 18/25, Ashirwad Building, ) Shrikrushna Peth, Amravati ) 66. Shri Amit Laxman Late, ) Age : Major, Occu - Service, ) R/o. Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Ahmednagar, Bharat Timber Tilak Road,) Ahmednagar ) 67. Shri Samir Sambhaji Wastre, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 39 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Pimpri-Chinchwad, Jog Center, ) Wakdewadi, Pune ) 68. Shri Vishalsing Ravindrasing Rajput,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur-1, M.I.D.C. Building, ) Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 69. Shri Pratap Mahadeo Gajre, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Pune-1, Jog Center, ) Wakdewadi, Pune ) 70. Shri Amar Akaram Katkar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur-2, Udyog Bhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 71. Shri Sarjerao Jaysing Bhoi, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur-2, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line,Nagpur) 72. Shri Utkarsh Ramesh Shingare, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Regional Office Pollution Control, ) Shri Chhatrapati Shivaji Maharaj, Mandai) Building, 4th Floor, Mata Ramabai ) Ambedkar Road, Mumbai - 01 ) 73. Shri Ajay Anandrao Khamkar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Satara Majunath/Major Commercial Building) Sadar Bazar, Satara ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 40 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 74. Shri Santosh Dnyanoba Dahiphale, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Taloja, Raigad Bhavan, C.B.D. Belapur, ) Navi Mumbai ) 75. Shri Vishal Vyankatrao Mundhe, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Ahmednagar, Bharat Timber, ) Tilak Road, Ahmednagar ) 76. Shri Vyankat Govindrao Bhatane, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Navi Mumbai-1, Raigad Bhavan, ) C.B.D. Belapur, Navi Mumbai ) 77. Shri Nandkishor Pandurang Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Kalyan-3, Siddhivinayak Sankul, ) Kalyan (W), Dist.Thane ) 78. Shri Nilesh Jijabrao Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, ) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 79. Shri Anand Sukhdeo Gurav, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Tarapur-1, M.I.D.C. Office Building, ) Tarapur, Dist. Thane ) 80. Shri Jayant Mahadeo Doke, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 41 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 81. Shri Ketan Ashok Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Mahad, Common Facility Center Building) M.I.D.C. Mahad, Dist. Pune ) 82. Shri Gajanan Shrirang Pawar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Mumbai, Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj) Mandai, 4th Floor, Mata Ramabai Ambedkar) Road, Mumbai - 01. ) 83. Shri Rajendra Pandurang Suryawanshi,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nashik, Udyogbhavan, Tryambak Road, ) Nashik ) 84. Shri Ulhas Uttamrao Kanade, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 85. Shri Sagar Rambhau Varhekar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Pollution Control Execution Division) Mah.Pollution Control Board, ) rd Kalpataru Point, 3 Floor, Near Sion Circle,) Mumbai (East) - 400022 ) 86. Shri Darshan Vishnudas Mhatre, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Ahmednagar, Bharat Timber, ) Tilak Road, Ahmednagar ) 87. Shri Vinod Ramkrushna Pawale, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 42 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Amravati-1, 18/25, Ashirwad Building, ) Shrikrushna Peth, Amravati ) 88. Shri Milind Ravindra Thakur, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Ahmednagar, ) Bharat Timber, Tilak Road, Ahmednagar) 89. Shri Jaydeep Jagannath Kumbhar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control) Akola, Near State Bank, Shastri Nagar ) Akola ) 90. Shri Samir Yashwant Hundlekar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Nagpur-2, Udyogbhavan, ) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 91. Shri Surendra Gajananrao Karandkar,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Nagpur-2, Udyogbhavan, ) Civil Line, Nagpur ) 92. Shri Manoj Narayan Wadhane, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 93. Shri Yogesh Dilip Patil, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 94. Shri Manish Arun Mahajan, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 43 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Nagpur-1, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 95. Smt.Suvarna Baburao Gaikwad, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Latur, Deo Towers, Latur. ) 96. Ku.Aruna Chandrakant Jadhav, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) 97. Smt.Renuka Ashok Kulkarni, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, ) Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) 98. Smt. Sujata Madhukar Magar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Jog Center, Wakdewadi, Pune ) 99. Smt.Shubhangi Ramesh Patankar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Navi Mumbai-2, Raigad Bhavan, ) C.B.D.Belapur ) 100. Smt.Priyashri Dipakrao Deshmukh,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nagpur, Udyogbhavan, Civil Line, Nagpur) 101. Smt.Dipali Damodharrao Lokhande,) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nashik, Udyogbhavan, Trymbak Road, ) Nashik ) 102. Deepali Manohar Tayade, ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 44 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Shri Chatrapati Shivaji Maharaj Mandai) 4th Floor, Mata Ramabai Ambedkar Road,) Mumbai ) 103. Smt.Varsha Ambadas Kadam, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control) Kolhapur, Udyogbhavan Building, ) Kolhapur ) 104. Smt.Snehal Madhavrao Kose, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Pollution Control Execution Division-1) Mah.Pollution Control Board, Mumbai ) Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, Near Sion Circle,) East Mumbai. ) 105. Smt.Rekha Murari Togare, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office Pollution Control,) Solapur, 4/B, Civil Line, Sat Road,Solapur) 106. Smt.Seema Pandharinath Salave, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nashik, Udyogbhavan, Tryambak Road, ) Nashik ) 107. Smt.Rupali Madhukar Kamble, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Pollution Control Execution ) Division-1, Mah.Pollution Control Board,) Mumbai, Kalpataru Point, 3rd Floor, ) Near Sion Circle East Mumbai. ) 108. Smt.Shilpa Amol Borade, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 45 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Thane-1, M.I.D.C. Complex Building, ) Infront of Mulund Naka, Thane ) 109. Smt.Deepali Ashok Tambe, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Nashik, Udyogbhavan, Trymbak Road, ) Nashik ) 110. Smt.Smita Dattatraya Sanap, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office,Pollution Control,) Amravati, 18/25, Ashirwad Building, ) Shrikrushna Peth, Amravati ) 111. Smt.Jyoti Shivaji Sutar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy. Regional Office Pollution Control,) Nanded, Lahoti Complex, ) Wazirabad, Nanded ) 112. Smt.Punam Sunil Payarekar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Amravati, 18/25, Ashirwad Building, ) Shrikrushna Peth, Amravati ) 113. Smt.Sushma Sangram Kumbhar, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Dy.Regional Office, Pollution Control,) Kolhapur, Udyogbhavan Building, ) Kolhapur ) 114. Smt.Rutika Sachin Dalavi, ) Age : Major, Occu.: Service, ) R/o : Pollution Control Execution Division-1,) Mah. Pollution Control Board, ) rd Mumbai, Kalpataru Point, 3 Floor, ) Near Sion Circle, East Mumbai ) ..... Respondents ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 46 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Mr. Subhash V.Mundhe for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.G.Gujarathi, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Mr.Shrihari Aney, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.A.S.Deshpande for the Respondent nos.2 and 3. Ms.Pradnya Talekar for the Respondent nos. 4 to 9, 11, 13 to 19, 21 to 27, 29 to 52, 54 to 67, 69, 71 to 78, 80 to 114. Mr.N.T.Tribhuwan for the Respondent no. 68. ALONGWITH WRIT PETITION NO. 7639 OF 2009 1. Nitin S/o Devendra Padwal, ) Age : 27 years, Occu.:Student, ) R/o, 28/178, Barshi Naka, Osmanabad, ) Dist. Osmanabad ) 2. Digambar S/o Damodar Bhutekar, ) Age : 27 years, Occu.:Student, ) R/o At Post Shinde Wadgaon, ) Tq. Ghansavangi, Dist. Jalna ) 3. Danish Khan Salim Khan Pathan, ) Age : 25 years, Occu.:Service, ) R/o, Tikhi, Post Bahulkheda, ) Tq.Soyegaon, Dist. Aurangabad ) 4. Kamal Rasulkhan Hasankhan, ) Age : 30 years, Occu : Service, ) R/o At Post Dalimb, ) Tq.Umarga, Dist. Osmanabad ) 5. Vijaykumar S/o Bhikusing Pawar, ) Age : 30 years, Occu : Service, ) R/o Hutatma Smarak, Anand Nagar, ) Jintur, Dist. Parbhani ) ..... Petitioners ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 47 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Versus 1. The State of Maharashtra, ) Through Secretary, ) Department of General Administration, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 ) 2. Administrative Officer, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Kalpataru Point, 3/4 Floor, ) Sion-Matunga Scheme, Road no.8, ) Opp.Sion Circle, Sion (E), Mumbai-22 ) 3. The Member Secretary, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Kalpataru Point, 3/4 Floor, ) Sion-Matunga Scheme, Road no.8, ) Opp.Sion Circle, Sion (E), Mumbai-22 ) 4. Lokhande Deepali Damodharrao ) Age - 30 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 5. Khose Snehal Madhavrao ) Age - 29 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 6. Khamkar Ajay Anandrao ) Age - 31 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 7. Bhatane Venkat Govindrao ) Age - 33 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 8. Shingare Utkarsh Ramesh ) Age - 28 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 9. Late Amit Laxman ) Age - 28 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) 10. Borkar Rameshwar Kundlikrao ) Age - 27 Yrs., Occ.- Service ) ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 48 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc All Residents of Administrative Officer, ) Maharashtra Pollution Control Board, ) Kalpataru Point, 3/4 Floor, ) Sion-Matunga Scheme, Road No.8, ) Opp.Sion Circle, Sion (E), Mumbai-22 ) ..... Respondents Mr. Sachin S.Deshmukh for the Petitioner. Mr.Y.G.Gujarathi, A.G.P. for the Respondent no.1. Mr.Shrihari Aney, Senior Advocate, a/w. Mr.A.S.Deshpande for the Respondent nos.2 and 3. Mr.S.D.Joshi for the Intervenor. CORAM : R.D. DHANUKA & SUNIL K. KOTWAL, JJ. RESERVED ON : 21st SEPTEMBER, 2017 PRONOUNCED ON : 22nd JANUARY, 2018 JUDGMENT (PER R.D.DHANUKA, J.):
By consent of parties, the aforesaid writ petitions were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. The State Government and the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board have made common arguments in all the five matters including in some of the civil applications. The petitioners also have made common arguments insofar as the submissions of law as well as identical facts are concerned. Some of the employees who were impleaded to the various petitions who are likely to be affected by this order have also advanced separate arguments partly adopting the submissions made by the State Government as well as by the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and partly by pointing out their individual facts which would be ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 49 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc summarized in the later part of this judgment.
The relevant facts and submissions in the petition in Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010 :-
2. In Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction in the nature of writ of mandamus and prays that the selection list including the waiting list as annexed with the writ petition at Ex.D for the post of Field Officer prepared by the respondent no.3 i.e. the Member Secretary, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board be quashed and set aside and seeks writ of mandamus by way of an order and direction against the State of Maharashtra, the Chairman, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board and the Member Secretary, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board to publish a fresh advertisement by giving fresh advertisement for filling up the post of Field Officer in the respondent no.3, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board is hereinafter referred to as 'MPCB' for the sake of convenience).
3. It is the case of the petitioner that he has completed his degree in engineering and is duly qualified for the post of Field Officer in the MPCB pursuant to the advertisement issued by the MPCB. The respondent no.1 is the State of Maharashtra. Respondent nos. 2 and 3 are the Officers of the MPCB who represents the MPCB. Respondent nos. 14 to 120 are the candidates who were selected by the MPCB for the post of Field Officer.
::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 :::kvm 50 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc
4. On 21st January, 2009, the MPCB published an advertisement in the newspaper inviting applications for various posts including the post of Field Officer. Insofar as the post of Field Officers are concerned, the said advertisement was published for inviting applications for filling up 34 posts. By a letter dated 27 th January, 2009, the petitioner raised objection pointing out various lacunae including that the State Government had not given wide publication of advertisement and thus other duly qualified persons could not apply in response to the said advertisement. The petitioner called upon the MPCB to furnish various particulars.
5. It is the case of the petitioner that the MPCB however suddenly published a list of candidates for the post of Field Officer including the waiting list. The said list provided the names of 105 candidates who were selected and further provided the names of 39 candidates who were shown in the waiting list. The said letter also provided the educational qualification of each of those candidates, their caste and also the marks obtained by them.
6. It is the case of the petitioner that though the advertisement was published by the MPCB in the month of January 2009, the actual selection was carried out after 10 months i.e. in the month of October 2009. The selection list was published on 6 th November, 2009. The Government was formed in the State of Maharashtra and the Chief Minister had taken his oath on 7 th November,2009. It is the case of the petitioner that on 9 th ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 51 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc November,2009 i.e. on Monday about 80% candidates who were selected by the MPCB for the post of Field Officer had joined the service. Within one day of the publication of the selection list, the call letters were alleged to have been received by the selected candidates and within one day they were all ready for the appointment and actually joined for the post.
7. The petitioner filed this writ petition on 22nd March,2010 for various reliefs. The learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the advertisement issued by the MPCB. The objections raised by the petitioner on 27 th January,2009, the selection list published by the MPCB and various Government resolutions including the resolutions dated 15th September 2006, 19th October 2007, various annexures to the petition, averments in the affidavits filed by the respondents and also tendered a compilation of the documents obtained by the petitioner under the provisions of Right to Information Act, i.e. ' Second Copy of Mark Memo of Field Officer Interview dated 22/10/2009 to 25/10/2009', list of selected candidates annexed at pages 79 to 89 etc.
8. Learned counsel for the petitioner made following submissions for consideration of this court :-
(a) The advertisement issued on 21st January, 2009 was only for filling up 34 post of Field Officers whereas the MPCB appointed 117 candidates in response to the said advertisement dated 21st January,2009. The advertisement ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 52 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc published in the newspaper was without any authority. The person who had published advertisement did not give his designation. There were no details in the advertisement about the authorized person and about the signatory thereto. The applications were invited and such applicants were directed to submit their applications in the post box kept for submission of the applications. No acknowledgement of the receipt of the applications were furnished. The MPCB did not call the persons who had applied for the said post in response to the advertisement issued by MPCB.
(b) The MPCB did not call the list from the Employment Exchange. The news was not
published through the Office of the Employment Exchange nor the advertisement was published on the website of the Government of Maharashtra and of Employment Exchange. The seniority list from the Office of the Employment Exchange was not called though was mandatory as per the policy decision taken by the State of Maharashtra in Government resolution dated 19th October,2007.
(c) The advertisement was published by the MPCB during the Code of Conduct i.e. during the election of Maharashtra Legislative Assembly and after receipt of applications i.e. after 10 months, ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 53 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc the candidates were called for interview. The petitioner was informed under the Right to Information Act that the oral permission was sought by the MPCB from the Office of the Election Commission which was granted.
(d) As per the Government policy described in Government resolution dated 15th September, 2006, which was framed in lieu of the order passed by the Supreme Court, the advertisement should have provided the name, the authority having its official address and phone number and e-mail ID so as to have impartial selection process. The procedure followed by the MPCB was in violation of and contrary to the Government policy described in Government resolution dated 15th September,2006.
(e) Though the Government resolution dated 19th October, 2007 prescribed for written
examination, no written examinations were held by the MPCB though the same was mandatory as per the said Government resolution. Though the selection process ought to have been conducted by providing written test, oral test was taken. Though the ratio of written and oral test ought to have been given separately and though the ratio of marks or written test ought to have given higher then the ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 54 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc oral test, no such procedure was followed by the MPCB while selecting large number of candidates. The procedure for recruitment ought to have specifically provided in the advertisement in terms of the government resolution which was not at all adhered to by the MPCB.
(f) The selection committee was not constituted in terms of the government guidelines as per the government resolution dated 10th December, 2004 and 19th October, 2007. One woman candidate ought to have appointed in the selection committee which norms were not followed by the MPCB.
(g) Though as per the advertisement, the qualification provides of any degree in engineering or post graduate in environment or equivalent qualification was provided for appointing the Field Officer while selecting the candidates, one candidate Mr.Karandkar Surendra Gajanan holding the Bachelor of Technology degree which was not equivalent to the qualified degree or post graduate in environment was selected.
(h) Learned counsel placed reliance on the order dated 9th January,2009 passed by the Division Bench of this court in case The Mumbai Medwaste Action Group vs. Union of India and ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 55 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc others in Public Interest Litigation No.32 of 2006 along with Public Interest Litigation No.41 of 2006 directing that the MPCB shall ensure that the proposal for appropriate staff be submitted to the Government by 12th January,2009 and the Government shall take decision thereon before the next date of the hearing and further directing to take steps to ensure that for the three remaining divisions, appropriate steps to be taken before that date for collection and disposal of waste, the MPCB has appointed a large number of candidates contrary to the said order dated 9th January, 2009.
(i) The MPCB has selected over-age candidates. The advertisement has provided the upper limit of 35 years. The MPCB however has appointed the candidates of 41 years and above on the pretext that those employees were already in service of MPCB or the State Government. The employees in the service of MPCB or the Government ought to have been considered as a regular service and the service of contract of service or daily wages. The candidates were given appointment without following the Government resolution dated 5th November, 2009 and without asking the candidates to submit caste validity certificate, when they were appointed on the ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 56 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc reserve post. The candidates those who were having more than two children were appointed on the selection process contrary to the policy decision taken by the State Government.
(j) The MPCB did not follow the ratio of 33% reservation of the remaining category though the said reservation was given by the Government resolution for the woman, Department of State including the MPCB. The candidates at serial nos. 56 to 62 and 14 to 16 who are some of the respondents in this petition have been selected though they were not in the list of selection or waiting list.
(k) The advertisement did not provide the reservation on the post under the category of Project Affected Person (PAP), handicapped candidates and freedom fighters and all other reservation which deprive such candidates to apply for such post.
(l) The MPCB has not followed the Maharashtra Pollution Control Board Employment Recruitment Rules, 1996 while selecting large number of candidates whose appointments are subject matter of this petition. Reliance is placed on the definition of 'test' under Rule 2(f) thereof ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 57 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc and 7. Rule 7(b) provides that unless already in service of Board/Government, the candidate should not be more than 35 years of age. No roaster was prepared by the MPCB since the year 2000.
(m) Our attention is invited to the minutes of the meeting prepared by MPCB. It is submitted that according to those minutes of the meeting, various candidates were alleged to have been interviewed between 22nd October, 2009 to 25th October,2009. On 22nd October, 2009 itself, the selection committee had alleged to have interviewed 257 candidates. The same method was adopted for remaining four days. The minutes of the meeting would show that the selection committee itself had made appointment of additional 114 posts without taking prior permission from the Government. The Field Officer had informed that there were additional posts available for appointment i.e. earlier 30 posts and additional 84 which were to be filled in view of the advertisement published on 21st January, 2009. No such information was provided in the advertisement.
(n) The reservation provided in the meeting for Scheduled Cast, Scheduled Tribe, Other Backward ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 58 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Classes exceeding 52% is not permissible in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court. The MPCB illegally increased the reservation from 52% recorded in the minutes of the meeting upto 65%. Though woman candidates were available, they were not appointed. The entire selection was conducted during the course of Code of Conduct based on oral permission alleged to have been obtained from the State Election Commission. Till today, no permission in writing is produced before this Court.
(o) A copy of the record of the selection process furnished to the petitioner under the provisions of Right to Information Act shows that all the members of the selection committee had given similar marks to almost all the candidates under different categories. One Mr.Tuljapurkar Dnyaneshwar Mishram though is shown as absent by the chair person of the committee, other four persons have given him 74 marks and the said candidate is appointed. The candidates at serial nos. 168 to 170 are marked as absent by the chairman of the selection committee. The other four members of the selection committee however have given them marks. The candidate at serial no.81 was initially shown having given marks but ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 59 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc was subsequently shown as absent. The marks of Mayuresh Ghorpade though were 73 which were identical to the marks allotted to Indrajit Deshmukh and Avinash Kadale and though Mayuresh Ghorpade who was senior in age ought to have been appointed, he was not appointed by the MPCB. Borkar and Mahajan were in the selection list, but the MPCB has not appointed the said candidates.
(p) Vastre and Tambe were not in the selection list, but they were appointed. Vishal Dixit who was at serial no.78 had secured 62 marks and was eligible for appointment from OBC category. His marks were subsequently reduced so as to knock out his name from the list of selected candidates. The marks in respect of other candidates in the said copy of the mark memo given by the selection committee are over written. One of the page in the said compilation is missing.
(q) It is submitted that the MPCB while recruiting the large number of candidates in the post of Field Officer have committed a fraud and has committed a systematic and well planned fraud while recruiting the large number of Field Officers and has committed gross violation of Government resolution and also the principles of law laid down ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 60 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc by the Supreme Court and this court. Learned counsel invited our attention to the observations made by this court in various orders against MPCB and State Government and more particularly in the order dated 12th July, 2010 passed by the Division Bench of this court and thereby making all the appointments made by the MPCB which are subject matter of this petition subject to the outcome of these petitions.
(r) Learned counsel for the petitioner also invited our attention to the various pages of the 'Mark Memo of Field Officer' to show that the interviews were alleged to have been conducted during the period between 22nd October, 2009 to 25th October, 2009 during the time between 9 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. with different intervals and would submit that the 254 candidates had alleged to have been interviewed on the same day which would be impossible to conduct between 9.00 a.m. to 4.00 p.m. i.e. between 9.00 a.m., 11.00 a.m., 12 noon and 4 p.m. He submits that the entire record is manipulated by the MPCB and shows a fraudulent method adopted by the MPCB to recruit a large number of persons thereby depriving the other candidates who were eligible for such appointment and have more qualified and suitable.
::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 61 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc (s) It is submitted that the MPCB had already
pre-determined about the number of candidates and the names of the candidates who only would be selected in deprivation of the other eligible candidates who were entitled to be appointed.
(t) It is submitted that a big scam committed by the MPCB is apparent on the face of the record and thus the entire selection procedure
fraudulently committed by the MPCB to select the large number of candidates in this fashion deserves to be set aside. He submits that though the petitioner in this case had not applied to any post in response to any advertisement published by the MPCB, the petitioner is still entitled to challenge the selection procedure. If the MPCB would have issued the correct advertisement in accordance with law and would have provided all the details of the post that would be filled up including the numbers thereof, the petitioner also could have applied to the said post.
(u) Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the following judgments in support of this submission:-
(a) Arup Das and Ors. vs. State of Assam and Ors., 2012 AIR SCW 1311 (Paragraphs 1, ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:30 ::: kvm 62 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 7, 8, 10 to 12) (b) Rakhi Ray and Ors. vs. High Court of Delhi and Ors., AIR 2010 SC 932 (Paragraphs 9, 14, 24 and 25) (c) Jitender Kumar Singh and Anr. vs. State of U.P. & Ors., AIR 2010 SC 1851 (Paragraphs 33m 35 and 36) (d) High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan vs. Veena Verma and Anr., AIR 2009 SC 2938 (Paragraphs 21 and 26) (e) State of J & K and others vs. Sanjeev Kumar & Ors., (2005) 4 SCC 148 (Paragraph 9) (f) Madan Lal and others vs. State of J. and K. and others, AIR 1995 SC 1088 (Paragraph 23) (g) Hitendra Singh & Ors. vs. Dr.P.D.Krishi Vidyapith & Ors., 2014 AIR SCW 2179 (Paragraphs 7, 8, 23 and 24) (h) State of Orissa and Anr. vs. Mamata Mohanty, (2011) 3 SCC 436 (Paragraph 35) (i) M.P.State Coop.Bank Ltd. Bhopal ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 63 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc vs.Nanuram Yadam and others, (2007) 8 SCC 264 (Paragraphs 18 and 24) (j) Suresh Kumar and others vs. State of Haryana and others, (2003) 10 SCC 276 (k) Union Public Service Commission vs.
Girish Jayanti Lal Vaghela and others, (2006) 2 SCC 482 (Paragraphs 21 and 24)
(l) Mohinder Singh Gill and another vs. The Chief Election Commissioner, New Delhi and others AIR 1978 SC 851 (Paragraph 8) Some of the relevant facts and submissions in Writ Petition No.7841 of 2009 :-
9. By this writ petition, the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to maintain 5% resolution quota for project affected persons for the post of Field Officer pursuant to an advertisement published on 21st January,2009 and prays that his case be considered as he be given appointment on the post of Field Officer by maintaining 5% quota for project affect persons. He also prays that the appointment of respondent nos. 3 to 8 on the post of Field Officer from project affected persons category on 4th August, 2009 and 6th October,2009 be quashed and set aside and seeks his appointment on the post of Field Officer. He seeks further declaration that the selection of respondent no.7 is illegal, bad in law and be quashed and set aside, being contrary to the Government resolution.
::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 :::kvm 64 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc
10. It is the case of the petitioner that he had been issued a certificate by the District Rehabilitation Officer of Aurangabad on 2 nd April, 2005 certifying that he came from the family of Project Affected Persons (PAP). The name of the petitioner had been registered in the Office of District Collector, Aurangabad. It is the case of the petitioner that he is eligible and entitled to be appointed on the post of Field Officer having fulfilled with all the eligibility criteria as per advertisement dated 21st January,2009. The petitioner has passed Bachelor of Engineering Course in Chemical Subject.
11. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in the advertisement issued by the MPCB, it was provided that out of 34 posts which was required to be filled on the post of Field Officer, one post was reserved for Scheduled Caste, 5 posts for Scheduled Tribe, 1 post for NT and 27 posts reserved for open category candidates. No post was however reserved for the project affected persons though required to be reserved as per the Government policy and resolutions. The petitioner submitted his application for the post of Field Officer.
The petitioner received a call letter from the respondent no.2 issued on 12th October,2009 calling upon him to attend the interview to be held on 24th October,2009 at 11.00 a.m. The petitioner appeared before the selection committee for interview.
12. It is submitted that by a Government resolution dated 21 st January, 1980, 5% posts are reserved for project affected persons and ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 65 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc persons depending upon such family out of total posts to be filled in all the Government Departments, Zilla Parishads, Municipal Corporations, Municipal Councils etc. a priority has to be given to such appointments. He submits that by another Government resolution dated 3rd January 1997, it was further declared that for appointment in Class III and Class IV posts, there should be 5% reservation out of total posts advertised for the persons from project affected persons. He also placed reliance on various other resolutions in support of this submission. He submits that the post of Field Officer is Class III category post.
13. It is submitted that though the advertisement was issued in respect of all the 34 posts of Field Officer, MPCB selected 105 candidates and kept 39 persons in the waiting list. Though the MPCB has maintained the reservation quota, SC, ST, NT, VJA, OBC categories etc. are maintained but there was not a single selection made from the category of project affected persons. He submitted that even if the advertisement was in respect of 34 posts, as per the reservation criteria of 5%, atleast two posts should have been kept to be filed in from project affected persons out of 5 persons which has not been maintained by the MPCB thereby violating various Government resolutions and guidelines. The petitioner was thus seriously affected and was deprived of legitimate appointment to the post of Field Officer.
14. It is submitted that though the name of the petitioner was registered with the office of the Collector, Aurangabad and he had ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 66 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc secured a degree in Engineering in Chemical subject which was an eligibility criteria, which was fulfilled by the petitioner, the petitioner was illegally not appointed by the MPCB.
15. It is submitted that the respondent nos. 3 to 8 are illegally appointed without following due procedure of law by MPCB in project affected persons category quota contrary to the conditions prescribed in Government resolution dated 18th August,2008 vide appointment order dated 6th October,2009. He submits that the respondent no.3 has been appointed on the post of Field Officer after publishing the advertisement on the basis of recommendation made by the District Collector, Jalgaon in respect of respondent no.3 subject to the advertisement published in the newspaper 'Daily Loksatta'. Another candidate Ravindra Govind Kshirsagar i.e. respondent no.4 was not having a requisite qualification, i.e. the said candidate having qualification of Bachelor of Technology (sugar) was appointed. The certificate of respondent no.6 Pankaj Bawane which was though transferred from his brother Makarand Bawane on 5 th September,2009 i.e. after publishing the advertisement, he was appointed illegally to one of the post of Field Officer.
16. It is submitted that the respondent no.7 was also appointed on the post of Field Officer who was not having a certificate of the project affected persons at the time of advertisement or at the time of selection. The project affected persons certificate was issued to the said candidate only on the date of the appointment i.e. 6 th October,2009. In support of this submission, learned counsel invited ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 67 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc my attention to various documents annexed to the petition.
17. It is submitted that the respondent nos. 4 to 8 are appointed on the post of Field Officers though their names were not recommended by the District Collector from the seniority list maintained by the Collector's Office. He submits that the Government resolution dated 18th August,2008 is ex-facie violated by the MPCB while making the appointment of the respondent nos. 4 to 8 and thus the said appointments are totally illegal. The petitioner has been deprived of the appointment to the said post and thus the appointments of respondent nos. 4 to 8 shall be quashed and set aside and the petitioner shall be appointed to one of the said post.
18. Insofar as other alleged illegalities pointed out by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.7841 of 2009 are concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner adopts the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in the said writ petition.
19. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited our attention to the Government resolution dated 18th August, 2008 and would submit that contrary to the said resolution, no post for project affected persons came to be advertised. The MPCB however illegally appointed six persons in the category of project affected persons who were not eligible nor were falling under the said category. He also placed reliance upon the order of the State Government dated 6th October,2009 annexed at page 41A-1 and also various paragraphs from the affidavit in reply of the respondent no.3 and also of the State Government and ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 68 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc MPCB. He submits that no seniority list was called by the MPCB of the project affected persons before making any appointment. The respondent no.3 has appointed directly on the instructions of the State Government illegally i.e. pursuant to the letter dated 24 th July, 2009. He also pointed out that the father of the respondent no.7 was issued project affected persons' certificate on 6th October,2009. The name of the respondent no.7 was included in the project affected persons category. On 6th October,2009 however the respondent no.7 was appointed under project affected persons category illegally. He invited our attention to the letter dated 6th October, 2007. It is submitted by the learned counsel that Ravindra Kshirsagar was not even qualified however was appointed in the category of project affected persons.
20. Insofar as respondent no.6 is concerned, it is submitted that certificate of transfer in the name of respondent no.6 was from his brother's name only on 5th February, 2009. The respondent no.6 however was illegally appointed to the post in the category of project affected persons. He submits hat the number of persons not having certificate of project affected persons on the date of advertisement or on the date of selection are still appointed. He submits that the JRF post occupied by one of the candidate was not a sanctioned post. However such candidate was illegally appointed as project affected persons candidate. He placed reliance on the judgment reported in case of Rajendra Pandurang Pagare & Anr. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2009(4) MLJ 961 and in particular paragraph 40.
::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 :::kvm 69 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Facts and submissions in Writ Petition No.7577 of 2009 :-
21. The petitioner has prayed for a writ of mandamus for setting aside the selection list, including the waiting list for the post of Field Officers and also prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the orders dated 6th November, 2009 passed by MPCB appointing the candidates for the post of Field Officers and further seeks writ of mandamus praying for an order and direction against the MPCB to appoint the petitioner on the post of the Field Officers and for other reliefs.
22. The petitioner has completed his B.Sc. In the year 1991 and has completed M.Sc. in Environment Science in the year 1993. The petitioner has also submitted the synopsis for PhD. in Environment Science and is working as a Junior Scientific Officer with the MPCB, regional office at Aurangabad. The petitioner was promoted to the said post of Junior Scientific Officer by an order dated 15th June, 2005. Insofar as the advertisement issued by the MPCB on 21st January, 2009, the petitioner applied for one of the post of the Field Officer. The petitioner participated in the selection procedure, however, his name was not found in the selection list. By an order dated 6th November, 2009, the MPCB appointed various candidates.
23. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the candidates who were at serial nos.56 to 62, are appointed by the MPCB, their names were not appearing in the selection list and though they had not participated in the selection process, they are ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 70 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc illegally appointed by MPCB. He submits that the appointment order issued in respect of the female candidates appearing at serial nos.14 to 16 are also not shown in the selection list. The candidates at serial no.89 in the appointment list is not qualified to the post of the Field Officer as per applicable recruitment rules in view of the fact that the said candidate is possessing the qualification B.Tech. in Agriculture.
24. It is submitted by the learned counsel that the Government of Maharashtra had issued an order dated 20th August, 2009 thereby granting a sanction to 84 posts of Field Officers. The MPCB however, has without issuing a fresh advertisements for the said 84 posts has recruited various candidates on such posts also pursuant to the advertisement which was issued on 20th January, 2009. The entire selection process conducted by MPCB was totally illegal and contrary to the procedure prescribed by various Government resolutions. The petitioner was fully qualified and experienced person and was fully eligible to one of the post of Field Officers. The petitioner did not fall under PAP category. The respondent nos.9 to 15 are however, appointed by the MPCB whose names were not in the selection list and had not participated in the selection process. According to the affidavit filed by MPCB, the respondent nos.9 to 15 belonged to Scheduled Tribe category. It is submitted that these appointments are arbitrarily made by the MPCB. It is submitted that the additional posts could not have been sanctioned by the Government after issuance of the advertisement which action was contrary to the judgment of the Supreme Court in case reported in (2005) 4 SRJ 290 and more particularly paragraph 13. Learned counsel adopted the submissions ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 71 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc made by the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010 insofar as the other submissions are concerned.
Facts and submissions in Writ Petition No.7730 of 2009 :-
25. By this petition, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus for quashing and setting aside the selection list, including the waiting list for the posts of the Field Officers carried out by the MPCB and for other reliefs. The petitioners have secured Engineering Degree and are working in different places. Pursuant to the advertisement issued by the MPCB on 21st January, 2009, the petitioners have made the applications to the MPCB for their appointment for the post of Field Officers. The petitioners had received the call letter dated 12th October, 2009 and were directed to remain present for oral interview on 24th October, 2009 and 25th October, 2009.
26. The Interview Committee of the MPCB changed the process of the oral interview as per the scheduled date on 22 nd October, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. and conducted the interviews as per the list published on internet. On 22nd October, 2009, the Interview Committee has alleged to have interviewed 257 candidates. Between 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. they had alleged to have allegedly completed oral interview of 126 candidates and between 11:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. they have conducted over all interview of 100 candidates and between 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m., they had alleged to have conducted the interview of 31 candidates. The respondent nos.2 and 3 had alleged to have completed ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 72 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc oral interview on 25th October, 2009 and lateron they had displayed the selection list on internet on 30th October, 2009 for the post of Field Officers.
27. Learned counsel for the petitioners invited our attention to the various annexures to the writ petition and also to the affidavits filed by some of the respondents and would submit that though the candidates who were eligible to apply for the said posts ought to have been the resident of Maharashtra State, the candidates at serial nos.14 and 15 on the waiting list were from Sikkim, Manipal University and have been selected. The candidates, who have completed B.Tech. (Agriculture) has been also selected at serial no.98. The candidates holding such B.Tech. (Agriculture) degree were not at all eligible for the post of the Field Officers, however were selected by the MPCB.
28. It is submitted that the candidates at serial nos.36, 50 and 74 were from open category and had crossed the age of 35 years and were thus not eligible, however, they had been selected for the post of the Field Officers. The MPCB ought to have conducted the written test which were not conducted. The entire procedure has been completed hurriedly without following the procedure of law. Most of the candidates appointed by the MPCB are the relatives of the employees of Board.
29. It is submitted that it was predetermined on the part of the MPCB to select these candidates, who are selected by the MPCB in violation of the Government resolutions and the directions issued by ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 73 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc the Central Pollution Board. The petitioners had participated in the selection procedure. No corrigendum was issued by the MPCB in the newspapers for increasing the posts. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan vs. Veena Varma & Anr. (2009) AIR SCW, 4685 and in particular paragraphs 21 and 26.
30. In support of his submission that the MPCB was required to conduct the written test, the learned counsel placed reliance on the judgment of this Court in case of Kisan Sukhdeo Lokhande vs. Collector, Akola (2004) 3 Mh.L.J. 742 and in particular paragraphs 19 and 20. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Smt.K. Lakshmi vs. State of Kerala, (2012) AIR SCW 1825, and in particular paragraphs 15 and 18 in support of his submission that the vacancies occurring after issuance of the advertisement cannot be filled up.
31. It is submitted by the learned counsel that as per the Government resolution dated 30th March, 2009, the handicapped person is not entitled to the post of Field Officers, whereas the candidates at serial nos.8 and 76 were appointed to the post of the Field Officers though the candidates were handicapped. The candidates at serial nos.14 and 15 whose names were not mentioned neither in the selection list nor in the waiting list, are appointed directly by the MPCB. The MPCB has also acted contrary to the Government resolution dated 27th June, 2008 directing all the departments in respect of the procedure required to be followed for filling up of the posts in ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 74 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc "C" category. Learned counsel for the petitioners adopted the other submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010.
Facts and submissions in Writ Petition No.7639 of 2009 :-
32. The petitioners have prayed for a writ of mandamus and for direction to the MPCB to undertake a fresh selection process pursuant to the advertisement date 23rd January, 2009 for the posts of the Field Officers, and also prayed for a writ of certiorari for quashing and setting aside the selection list dated 28th October, 2009 prepared by the MPCB.
The petitioners are the post graduates from the faculty of Environment Science and were possessing the requisite qualifications for the appointment for the posts of Field Officers. In response to the advertisement dated 21st January, 2009, issued by the MPCB, the petitioner applied for the post of Field Officers. The petitioners received the call letters from the MPCB and were called for the purpose of interview. About 840 candidates were called for interview as against 34 post advertised by the MPCB.
33. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the selection list prepared by the MPCB would indicate that the candidates at serial nos.1, 3, 25, 31, 41, 42, 52 and 55 were though possessing the qualification of M.E.M., which was not to be treated as equivalent since the said faculty was the Commerce faculty and was not the ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 75 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc degree either in Engineering or Environment Science as prescribed in the advertisement dated 21st January, 2009, those candidates were appointed by the MPCB contrary to and in violation of the eligibility criteria mentioned in the advertisement.
34. It is submitted that the candidates at serial nos.68 and 76 though were possessing the qualification of post graduate diploma in Environment Science, only those candidates were also appointed in contravention of the qualification prescribed in the advertisement.
35. It is submitted that the candidate at serial no.13 viz. Hemant Vasant Kulkarni, whose name was appearing in the waiting list, who even did not apply pursuant to the advertisement nor his name was appearing in the selection list, who were called for the interview, the said candidate was appointed as one of the Field Officer. It is submitted that the candidates whose names are at serial nos.36, 50, 74 and 99 had over aged i.e. had crossed the age of 35 years but were still appointed to the post of the Field Officers. The MPCB while preparing the selection list did not implement the criteria for providing reservation and acted contrary to the scheme of reservation.
36. It is submitted that no concession was provided to appoint the existing staff working in some other department. The MPCB has violated these norms also. Learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in case of Secretary, A.P. Public Service Commission vs. B. Swapna and Ors. (2005) 4 SCC 154 and in particular paragraph 10 in support of the submission ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 76 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc that there cannot be appointment beyond the number of vacancy advertised and also to buttress the contention that the norms of the selection cannot be altered after the commencement of the selection process. He adopted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner in Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010 insofar as the other issues involved in the petition are concerned.
37. Mr.Srihari Aney, learned senior counsel with Mr.Ajay Deshpande, learned counsel appearing for the MPCB on the other hand submits that insofar as Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010 is concerned, the petitioner had admittedly not participated in the selection process. The petitioner has also not prayed for his appointment to the post of Field Officer. The petitioner has not challenged the appointment of the candidates who were selected by the MPCB which according to the petitioner were illegal. He submits that if the illegalities are of such nature that it cannot be cured individually, only in that event, the whole selection process can be set aside and not otherwise. The petitioner has no locus to file this petition in his individual capacity.
It is submitted that none of the writ petitions are in the nature of public interest litigation. The action initiated by the petitioner in this case is not action in rem but is in personam and thus unless the petitioner is individually aggrieved by the acts of the MPCB and prays for setting aside the selection of the particular candidates which is illegal according to the petitioner and in whose place the petitioner deserves to be appointed, no relief can be granted by this court in this petition. This court is not hearing any public interest ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 77 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc litigation.
38. It is submitted that since the appointment of none of the candidates is challenged by the petitioner in the Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010, such writ petition is a futile writ petition and cannot be entertained by this Court.
39. Learned senior counsel invited our attention to various grounds raised in the Writ Petition No.3608 of 2010 and more particularly grounds (l), (n), (m) and (p) and would submit that each of the grounds raised in the writ petition are totally vague and without particulars. He submits that no woman candidate has filed any writ petition challenging the alleged irregularities or illegalities committed by the MPCB in conducting the selection procedure and making appointments of various candidates to the post of the Field Officer. He submits that only 60 candidates who were eligible to the post of Field Officer have been appointed by the MPCB. He submits that since the pleadings of the petitioners in each case are totally vague, the MPCB was not required and expected to give a detail explanation to such vague pleadings. The MPCB is not expected to answer any vague plea.
40. Learned senior counsel invited our attention to various averments made in the affidavit filed by the MPCB. He submits that the Environment Department, Government of Maharashtra had sanctioned 31 posts on the establishment of the respondent for effective implementation of the Bio-Medical Waste (Management and ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 78 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Handling) Rules, 1998 in compliance with the order passed by this court in the public interest litigation bearing Writ Petition Nos.32 of 2006 and 41 of 2006 respectively. He submits that this court had directed the MPCB in those two public interest litigation to fill up those posts to cope up with the increase workload of the Board due to entrustment of the implementation of the said rules. The MPCB had accordingly issued an advertisement in various newspaper for filling up the post on the establishment of the board including 34 posts of Field Officers. He submits that out of 34 posts, 24 posts of Field Officer were sanctioned by the State Government in compliance with the order dated 9th January,2009 passed by this court in Writ Petition Nos. 32 of 2006 and 41 of 2006. He submits that the remaining 10 vacancies had arisen from the existing sanctioned posts of the Field Officer prior to the date of the said order dated 9 th January,2009 passed by this court in the aforesaid two writ petitions. He invited our attention to the aforesaid order dated 9th January,2009 passed by this Court.
41. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that MPCB had received 1147 applications from various candidates from throughout the Maharashtra in response to the said advertisement dated 21st January,2009. The MPCB had appointed the selection committee consisting of Deputy Secretary, Environment Department, Government of Maharashtra, Senior Most Officer of the Board of the respective Branches, Social Welfare Officer, Senior Administrative Officer as the Member Secretary of the said selection committee under the Chairmanship of the Member Secretary of the MPCB vide Office order ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 79 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc dated 1st January, 2008. He submits that the said selection committee had conducted oral interviews at the office of the MPCB during the period between 22nd October,2009 to 25th October,2009 as per Maharashtra Pollution Control Board Employees Recruitment Regulation 1996. He submits that under Rule 2(f) of those Recruitment Rules, the expression 'Test' is defined as oral test/interview prescribed by the Board.
42. It is submitted that out of 843 deserving candidates called for interview, 592 candidates appeared for the interview. The selection committee had decided the criteria for giving the marks for various subjects as such as (a) knowledge and experience = 30 marks, (b) qualification and academic performance = 30 marks, (c) personality and presentation = 30 marks and (d) general awareness = 10 marks. He submits that in the meantime the Environment Department, Government of Maharashtra sanctioned 517 new posts on the establishment of the board which included 84 new post of Field Officers created on the establishment of the board. He submits that by an order dated 18th October,2003 passed by the Supreme Court in the matter of Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Resource Policy vs. Union of India and others, the Supreme Court issued various directions to be complied with by the State Pollution Control Board and various other authorities in time bound manner.
43. It is submitted that the MPCB had appointed M/s.Crisil Advisory Services to make suggestions regarding the infrastructure and make recommendations regarding the additional manpower for ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 80 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc implementation of the various environmental laws. He submits that the MPCB considered the said report submitted by M/s.Crisil Advisory Services in the meetings held on 25 th February, 2009 and 12th March,2009 and resolved that there was an urgent need of additional manpower on the establishment of the MPCB more than double the existing strength. It was resolved that atleast 620 posts should be sanctioned immediately. The MPCB had accordingly submitted a proposal to the Government of Maharashtra, Environment Department for necessary approval. The State Government however sanctioned 517 posts including 84 posts of Field Officers. The MPCB therefore considered to fill up 84 newly sanctioned posts of Field Officers along with 34 posts which were advertised earlier by the respondent board in view of the fact that sufficient number of eligible candidates were available for the interviews and accordingly recommended 113 candidates for appointment as against 34 posts which were advertised.
44. It is submitted that no prejudice of any nature whatsoever was caused to any of the petitioners if more candidates were appointed to the post of Field Officers than the number of posts advertised by MPCB. He submits that out of 117 posts, 84 candidates were appointed on the sanctioned posts whereas 24 candidates were appointed on sanctioned post in compliance with the order passed by this court in two public interest litigations. 9 candidates were appointed in view of the vacancies arisen in the meanwhile. The Government permitted the MPCB to fill up all the posts in view of the fact that the large number of candidates had applied for the said 34 posts and were available for filling up the additional posts. He submits ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 81 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc that the appointment of additional candidates was in these circumstances and such action on the part of the MPCB was not unlawful.
45. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the MPCB had applied for necessary permission to the Election Commission to conduct the interviews in view of the fact that the elections were announced during the period when the applications were received and scrutinized by the MPCB and the Code of Conduct had made applicable throughout Maharashtra due to such Assembly Election. The Election Commissioner had granted an oral approval to the MPCB to conduct the interviews of the candidates called for the interviews. He submits that the submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioners in each of these petitions that the approval from the Election Commissioner was not obtained before conducting interviews was thus factually incorrect.
46. Learned senior counsel for the MPCB invited our attention to the terms and conditions provided in the advertisement issued by MPCB and would submit that under those terms and conditions, the MPCB was empowered to relax the conditions in case of reserved category. Whatever number of posts were mentioned in the advertisement, the backlog was capable of being changed. The number of posts could be changed after advertisement was issued and also the reservation.
47. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the name ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 82 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc of the Department was not mentioned in the advertisement for the reason that no candidate should approach the department which had issued such advertisement with a view to see that there was transparency in the selection procedure in making appointment of various candidates to various posts. He submits that merely because the name of the particular department which issued the advertisement was not mentioned, the same would not affect the candidates who proposed to apply for such posts in any manner whatsoever. All other details were already given in the advertisement. He submits that the petitioner has not challenged the virus of the Recruitment Rules, 1996 which are followed by the MPCB while conducting the selection process while making various appointments pursuant to the said advertisement. Those rules are statutory in nature and are binding on the MPCB as well as on the parties.
48. Insofar as 30% reservation for women quota is concerned, it is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the said 30% reservation was considered by the MPCB and under that quota 20 women Field Officers were selected who had already joined their duties as Field Officers in the MPCB. Some of the Field Officers who had not joined the duties and some of them had resigned after joining the service with the board, the candidates had been placed in their places as per the seniority list from the waiting list.
49. It is submitted that the MPCB had initially prepared a list of 105 candidates and had placed the said merit list on the website of the board. Some of the Scheduled Tribe candidates however noticed ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 83 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc that they had submitted the documentary evidence about their caste and were already interviewed and their revised merits lists as per their marks were placed on the website of the board. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that on 5th November,2009 the MPCB had issued final selection list which is admittedly not challenged by the petitioner in the writ petition. The said list was published on the website on 29th October,2009.
50. Insofar as appointment of Mr.Pantavane who was handicapped is concerned, it is submitted that the said candidate was an eligible candidate from handicapped category for whom the age limit prescribed in the Government resolution dated 10 th May, 2002 was 45 years. He was thus rightly called upon for the interview by the MPCB and was appointed.
51. Insofar as appointment of Pratap Garje is concerned, it is submitted that he had been appointed for VJ(A) category of caste and as per Government resolution dated 5th December,1994 had been permitted to interchange the category of the appointment of candidate from VJ(A) to NT(D). He submits that the MPCB has appointed backward class candidate as per the Government resolution dated 16th November,2007 and there was no illegalities committed by the MPCB insofar as appointment of the backward class candidates are concerned. He submits that after scrutiny, it was found that the candidates at serial nos.57 to 63 of the selection list were from Schedule Tribe and therefore were placed on the website of the respondent instead of serial nos. 56 to 62.
::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 :::kvm 84 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc
52. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the backlog had been filled up against total number of posts in the cadre of Field Officers i.e. 204, taking into consideration roaster points in various categories including handicapped and woman reservation.
WRIT PETITION NO. 7841 OF 2009
53. Mr.Aney, learned senior counsel for MPCB invited our attention to some of the averments made in the affidavit filed by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra dated 13th August 2010 in Writ Petition No.7841 of 2009. He submits that it is clear that the Environment department accorded its approval on 20 th August 2009 for creation of additional 517 posts including 84 posts of Field officers. He submits that in the said affidavit, the State Government has contended that since the applications received were more than three times of the number of posts to be filled in, all 118 posts could be filled up from those applicants. The said decision was taken consciously to avoid re-advertisement and to save time. It is stated in the said affidavit that it would have been prudent for the Member Secretary to seek the consent of the Chairman since the number of vacancies went up by more than two times.
54. Learned senior counsel for MPCB states that the State Government has also clarified and dealt with various issues raised by the petitioner in various petitions and has denied the averments made by the petitioner in most of the petitions. He submits that ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 85 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc though in the said affidavit, the State Government made its decision clear, none of the petitioners applied for any amendment to the writ petition so as to challenge the list dated 5 th November 2009 which was final selection list issued by MPCB. He submits that the list was already published on the website of MPCB on 29th October 2009.
55. In so far as the issue raised by the petitioner that large number of the candidates were interviewed by the selection committee appointed by MPCB on the same day which was impossible is concerned, it is submitted by the learned senior counsel that it is not open to this Court to examine such issue. He submits that every wrong cannot be corrected in a writ petition and even if it is wrong, unless it is illegal, it cannot be set aside by this Court.
56. In so far as the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that all the candidates were given same marks by all committee members of the selection committee under different heads which shows malafides and fraud on the part of MPCB is concerned, it is submitted by the learned senior counsel for MPCB that giving of same marks to all the candidates by all the members of the selection committee is not a crime and no conclusion can be drawn by this Court based on such marking. He submits that no such plea has been raised by the petitioner in the writ petition. He however submits that he is not able to explain why and how the same marks were given to all the candidates by all the members of the selection committee under different heads. He however submits that it is not the case of any of the petitioners that all the candidates were given same marks ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 86 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc with malafides intention. No legal injury is caused to the petitioner even if all the candidates were given same marks by all the members of the selection committee under different heads. He submits that even if the same marks given by all the members of the selection committee to all the candidates who were selected, it would not amount to an actionable claim.
57. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the State Government in its affidavit has rightly contended that the appointment of all the reserved category candidates were in consonance with the reservation policy. The board did not consider the future vacancy or probable vacancy but considered the actual vacancy and sanctioned the post on the date of filling up the vacancy.
58. Learned senior counsel for MPCB distinguishes an unreported judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court on 6th May 1997 in Civil Application No.818 of 1997 in Writ Petition No.2443 of 1993 in the case of Bhagwantrao R. Shira & Ors. Vs. The Maharashtra State Pollution Control Board and Anr. (supra) on the ground that the facts before this Court in that case were totally different.
59. Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for MPCB on the subsequent day relied upon the following judgment of the Supreme Court in support of various submissions made by Mr.Aney, learned senior counsel for MPCB and tendered compilation thereof.
i) Ashok Kumar & Ors. Vs.State of Bihar & ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 87 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc Ors., 2011 (1) SCC 150 (paragraphs 12, 13 & 21); ii) Prem Singh Vs.HSEB, 1996 (4) SCC 319 (paragraphs 25 & 26); iii) Inderpreet Singh Kehlon & Ors. Vs. State of Punjab & Ors., AIR 2006 SC 2571 (paragraphs 40 and 54); iv) UPSC Vs. Dr.Jamuna Kurup & Ors., (2008) 11 SCC 10 (paragraph 15).
60. It is submitted by Mr.Deshpande, learned counsel for MPCB that all members of the selection committee were independent and highly qualified members and were not capable of being influenced by any party and if any malice is attributed against the members of the selection committee, they would be necessary party to the writ petition. He submits that it is not possible now to conduct any probe into the record of selection committee to find out as to on what basis the marks were given by the selection committee to the selected candidates.
61. Mr.Dixit, learned senior counsel for the respondent nos.4 to 8 submits that the advertisement issued by MPCB for inviting applications for the posts of field officers was on 21st January 2009 whereas this writ petition was filed by the petitioner only on 6 th November 2009 belatedly. The respondent nos.4 to 8 were subsequently added as party-respondents to the writ petition. He submits that the petitioner has amended the writ petition and has ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 88 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc added various grounds, in so far as the challenge of the appointment of the respondent nos.3 to 8 is concerned, in the month of April 2010. He invited our attention to the affidavit-in-reply filed by his clients. It is submitted that his clients were already in service with MPCB on a contract basis with consolidated salary of Rs.8,000/- per month. In support of this submission, learned senior counsel invited our attention to some of the annexures to the affidavit-in-reply showing the appointments of his clients on a contract basis by MPCB.
62. It is submitted that since the respondent nos.4 to 8 were already in service on a contract basis, after considering their merits and qualifications, they were also called for interview by the selection committee of the MPCB. The respondent nos.4 to 8 were present for interview and after considering their experience and educational qualification and in view of they being already in service on a contract basis, they were selected on merits for the post of Junior Research Fellow for the period of one year by issuing an appointment order dated 29th July 2006 to 31st July 2007. The respondent nos.4 to 8 were again appointed by issuing another appointment order dated 29th July 2006 since they were in service with MPCB on a contract basis. He submits that the State Government had issued a letter dated 24 th July 2009 in favour of Member Secretary of the MPCB directing them to give priority to the contractual employee i.e. Junior Research Fellows who had requisite qualification for the post of field officers.
63. It is submitted that in so far as the respondent no.7 is ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:31 ::: kvm 89 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc concerned, his appointment was confirmed under the category of project affected persons. The land of the respondent no.7 was acquired in the year 2005 by issuing the notification dated 10 th August 2005 under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act. The District Rehabilitation Officer had issued a certificate on 6 th October 2009 to the effect that the respondent no.7 was a project affected person. It is submitted that in so far as the respondent no.5 i.e. Manohar Rustam Wakale is concerned, he belonged to the Scheduled Caste category and he is also project affected person and, therefore, his appointment was considered under the Scheduled Caste category. In so far as the respondent no.4 i.e. Ravindra Govind Kshirsagar is concerned, he had passed the Bachelor of Technology (Sugar) which was one of the degree equivalent to the B.E. (Sugar).
64. Learned senior counsel for the respondent nos.4 to 8 placed reliance on the Government Resolution dated 18 th July 2008 and would submit that 5% quota was reserved for project affected person and thus they were not requited to file any application for the said post in reservation of the project affected person. Learned senior counsel placed reliance on the letter addressed by the Deputy Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra to the MPCB on 23 rd July 2009 informing that 5% posts were to be reserved for project affect person. He submits that at the time of filing of an application for the post of field officer, the respondent no.7 could not have any certificate of project affected person. The application was made by the respondent no.7 on 17th September 2009 whereas the Government had issued a certificate of project affected person to the ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:32 ::: kvm 90 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc respondent no.7 on 6th October 2009.
65. Learned senior counsel does not dispute that no seniority list was called from the Collector for filling up the quota of 5% for project affected person. He placed reliance on the judgment delivered by the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Pandurang Pagare and Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (supra) and in particular paragraph 40 thereof. He placed reliance on paragraph 'H' of the affidavit-in-reply dated 13th August 2010 filed by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra contending that as per the information given by MPCB officer, the said 5 candidates were appointed on 6th October 2009 who were already in service with MPCB on contract basis and as per the Government letter dated 24th July 2009, the board was requested to consider the PAP employees who were already in service on a priority and thus they were appointed on the posts of field officers.
66. Learned senior counsel placed reliance on the averments made in the affidavit dated 9th August 2012 filed by Ms.Sujata Shetye, the Accounts Officer (Establishment Branch) of the MPCB-the respondent no.2 herein which was filed in compliance with the directions issued by this Court in this writ petition to the state whether the respondent nos.4 to 8 had been recruited against 34 vacancies so advertised and whether any preference has been given to them as project affected person ? He submits that according to the said affidavit, the project affected candidates were appointed as per the Government Resolution dated 18th July 2008 and such project ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:32 ::: kvm 91 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc affected persons were not required to be filled up or were not required to apply pursuant to any advertisement and to compete with other candidates. In the said affidavit, it is stated that the selection of the project affected candidates i.e. the respondent nos.4 to 8 were not done by selection procedure of advertisement and interview was not conducted for their appointment. No list was called by MPCB while recruiting project affected employees in the MPCB as field officers. He invited out attention to the order dated 6 th October 2009 appointing the respondent nos.4 to 8 in MPCB as field officers.
67. It is submitted by the learned senior counsel that the appointment of the respondent nos.4 to 8 has been challenged by the petitioner only in this writ petition. The challenge to 5% quota of project affected person was not successful in the Writ Petition No. 6463 of 2011 which petition was dismissed by an order dated 1 st February 2012. The age of the petitioner in the year 2009 was 30 years.
68. Learned senior counsel invited our attention to the prayers made in the writ petition. Learned senior counsel placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Madan Lal & Ors. Vs. State of J. and K. & Ors., reported in AIR 1995 SC 1088 and more particularly paragraphs 3, 4, 6, 8, 9, 10, 17, 21 and 25 thereof. He also placed reliance on the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Madras Institute of Development Studies & Anr. Vs. K. Sivasubramaniyan & Ors. in Civil Appeal No.6465 of 2015 delivered on 20th August 2015 and in particular paragraphs 3, ::: Uploaded on - 23/01/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 24/01/2018 01:59:32 ::: kvm 92 WP3608.10&connected matters.doc 4, 12, 17, 18 and 25 in support of the submission that the petitioner having participated in the selection process, he cannot allowed to challenge the selection procedure. He also placed reliance on the judgment of the Full Bench of this Court in the case of Rajendra Pandurang Pagare and Anr.(supra).