Unemployed youth move Bombay High Court over delayed induction despite appointment letter
In a glaring instance of bureaucratic apathy, a young man from Sindhudurg district has moved the Bombay High Court after being left jobless for over eight months despite holding a valid appointment letter issued by a government-appointed agency.
Sumedh Shivaji Jadhav, a postgraduate in English literature from Sawantwadi, was selected in October 2024 as an Assistant Programme Officer under the Employment Guarantee Scheme (EGS) in Maharashtra. The recruitment was conducted by S2 Infotech International Limited, a private contractor appointed by the State government to manage staffing for the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Scheme (MGNREGS).
According to the writ petition filed by Jadhav, he received his appointment letter on October 10, 2024. The very next day, S2 Infotech formally informed the Deputy Collector of the EGS branch in Sindhudurg of Jadhav's selection. However, despite repeated follow-ups and visits to the EGS office in Sindhudurg as well as Mantralaya in Mumbai, Jadhav was never officially inducted into the role.
'I kept visiting the offices, but they offered no clear response,' said Jadhav in his petition, adding that he remains unemployed even as vacancies for the position persist.
Frustrated by the silence, Jadhav filed a Right to Information (RTI) request earlier this year, only to receive confirmation that the Assistant Programme Officer post at the Sawantwadi EGS office has been vacant since April 1, 2025.
The petition raises key constitutional questions under Article 226 and seeks court direction to the State and S2 Infotech to induct him into the position for which he has been selected. It argues that despite following due procedure and clearing the recruitment process, Jadhav has been deprived of a livelihood due to inaction by the authorities.
The petition said that there is a growing trend where contractual recruitment through private agencies results in ambiguity, delays, and lack of accountability.
The petition also includes communications between S2 Infotech and the EGS department, the appointment letter, and the RTI reply, substantiating his claim.
Jadhav has urged the court to intervene to prevent further injustice not just to him, but to ensure transparency and fairness in government-contracted recruitment processes. The Bombay High Court is expected to take the matter for a hearing in the coming weeks.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
37 minutes ago
- Business Standard
SC rejects Lalit Modi's plea seeking BCCI to pay ₹10.65 cr ED penalty
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed a plea by former cricket administrator Lalit Modi, who had sought a direction to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to pay a ₹10.65 crore penalty imposed on him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (Fema), reported news agency PTI. A bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and R Mahadevan upheld the Bombay High Court's earlier decision, which had rejected Modi's petition and imposed costs, but clarified that Modi may pursue appropriate civil remedies if he chooses. Bombay HC called petition frivolous and misconceived The case stemmed from a December 19, 2023, ruling by the Bombay High Court, which dismissed Lalit Modi's plea as 'frivolous and misconceived' and directed him to pay ₹1 lakh to Tata Memorial Hospital within four weeks. The high court held that the Fema penalty had been imposed on Modi in his personal capacity and not in connection with any public function or statutory duty. Therefore, the court found no legal basis for asking the BCCI to bear the penalty on his behalf. Modi had argued that during his tenure as BCCI vice-president and chairman of the Indian Premier League (IPL) governing council, the board was bound to indemnify him under its internal regulations. He maintained that the penalty arose from actions carried out in his official capacity. No writ against BCCI under Article 12 The high court also observed that despite this legal position being well established, Modi filed the petition in 2018 seeking a writ remedy that was not available in law.
Time of India
40 minutes ago
- Time of India
Maharashtra withdraws Hindi language orders in schools after backlash, forms review panel
Mumbai, Amid a growing chorus against the introduction of the Hindi language in Maharashtra schools from classes 1 to 5, the state cabinet on Sunday decided to withdraw two GRs (government orders) on the implementation of the three-language policy. Addressing a press conference on the eve of the monsoon session of the state legislature, Chief Minister Devendra Fadnavis also announced the formation of a committee under educationist Dr Narendra Jadhav to suggest the way forward and implementation of the language policy. The panel has sought three months to study the issue and prepare a report. Fadnavis alleged Uddhav Thackeray had accepted the recommendations of the Dr Raghunath Mashelkar committee to introduce a three-language policy from class 1 to 12 when he was chief minister and set up a committee to implement the policy. "The state cabinet has decided to withdraw the Government Resolutions (GR) issued in April and June regarding the implementation of the three-language policy from class one. A committee headed by Dr Narendra Jadhav will be formed to recommend implementation (of the three-language formula)," Fadnavis said. He said the government will take a fresh decision based on the report of Dr Jadhav, a former member of the Planning Commission and ex-Vice Chancellor. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch vàng CFDs với sàn môi giới tin cậy IC Markets Tìm hiểu thêm Undo "The other names of the committee will be announced in some days. The panel will study the Mashelkar Committee's report and suggest from which standard (class 1 or otherwise) the three language formula will be implemented,'' he said. The Fadnavis government had issued a GR on April 16, making Hindi a compulsory third language for students in classes 1 to 5 studying in English and Marathi medium schools. Amid backlash, the government issued an amended GR on June 17 making Hindi an optional language. The move was criticised by the Opposition- Shiv Sena (UBT), MNS, and NCP (SP)- which dubbed it the "imposition" of Hindi in Maharashtra. Fadnavis acknowledged the difference of opinion over finalising the grade (class 1 or 5) for implementing the three-language formula. "The decision (on language policy) has been taken in the interest of Marathi students. If three languages are taught, students will get credit in the academic bank," he added. Fadnavis said the then CM Thackeray had appointed an 18-member Mashelkar Committee on September 21, 2020, comprising reputed figures from the education sector, on how to implement the NEP. A GR was issued on October 16, 2020. "The committee submitted a 101-page report on September 14, 2021. The panel stated that apart from the Marathi language, English and Hindi languages should be taught in classes 1 to 12. The report was tabled in the state cabinet on January 7, 2022. The minutes of the cabinet meeting are available,'' he said. He claimed Shiv Sena (UBT) leader Vijay Kadam, who runs an educational institution, was a member of the Mashelkar committee. Fadnavis also claimed Uddhav didn't mention that his government disagreed with the Mashelkar committee's report. "At that time, Uddhav didn't say that his government was not accepting the three-language formula. The then government set up a sub-group on the Mashelkar Committee's report," he added. Accusing Uddhav Thackeray of playing politics over the language issue, Fadnavis said the Shiv Sena (UBT) chief was opposing the Hindi language as he wants to "lay red carpet for the English language". Fadnavis said the Mahayuti government headed by him issued the two GRs in April and June as part of the sub-group set up by the then Thackeray-led MVA government. "We changed the decision to make the Hindi language mandatory and made it optional," he added. Shiv Sena (UBT) and MNS had announced a joint march on July 5 to oppose the "imposition" of the Hindi language. The march was cancelled after the government withdrew the GRs. Fadnavis also took potshots at MNS chief Raj Thackeray. "Raj Thackeray was nowhere in the picture at that time. He should ask Uddhav why his stand changed when his party joined the Opposition," he said. Fadnavis said Babasaheb Ambedkar wanted everyone to learn the Hindi language. "Any Indian who doesn't accept this proposal as part and parcel of a linguistic state has no right to be an Indian. He may be 100 per cent Maharashtrian, 100 per cent Gujarati, and 100 per cent Tamil, but he cannot be an Indian in the real sense of the word, except in geographical sense. If my suggestion is not accepted, India will then cease to be India," he said quoting Ambedkar from "Dr Babasaheb Ambedkar: writings and speeches". Deputy Chief Ministers Ajit Pawar and Eknath Shinde were also present at the presser. Pawar appealed to Marathi people not to participate in the morcha given the government's decision to withdraw the GRs. Shinde said the government's decision will be in the interest of students. "We have no ego," he added. PTI Is your child ready for the careers of tomorrow? Enroll now and take advantage of our early bird offer! Spaces are limited.
Mint
42 minutes ago
- Mint
Supreme Court rejects Lalit Modi's plea asking BCCI to pay ₹10.65 crore FEMA penalty
The Supreme Court on Monday dismissed former cricket administrator Lalit Modi's plea seeking an order directing the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to pay a penalty of ₹ 10.65 crore imposed on him by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) for alleged violations of the Foreign Exchange Management Act (FEMA). A Supreme Court bench comprising Justices P S Narasimha and R Mahadevan ruled that Lalit Modi could pursue civil remedies available under the law but refused to compel the BCCI to bear the penalty amount. This Supreme Court decision follows a December 19, 2023, ruling by the Bombay High Court which had termed Lalit Modi's petition 'frivolous and wholly misconceived,' while imposing a cost of ₹ 1 lakh on him. The Bombay High Court had observed that the penalty was personally imposed on Lalit Modi by the adjudicating authority under FEMA, and there was no legal basis to direct the BCCI to pay the fine. Lalit Modi had contended that during his tenure as the BCCI's vice-president and chairman of the Indian Premier League (IPL) governing council—a subcommittee of the BCCI—the board was obliged under its bylaws to indemnify him for actions taken in his official capacity. However, the Bombay High Court referred to a 2005 Supreme Court judgment clarifying that the BCCI does not qualify as a 'state' under Article 12 of the Constitution. Consequently, the Bombay HC held that no writ could be issued against the BCCI in matters unrelated to the discharge of public functions. 'In matters of alleged indemnification of the petitioner in the context of penalties imposed by the ED, there is no question of discharge of any public function, and therefore, for this purpose, no writ could be issued to the BCCI,' the High Court had stated. Despite clear directions from the Supreme Court, Lalit Modi had filed the petition in 2018, which the High Court dismissed. The Supreme Court on Monday, 30 June, upheld this dismissal, reiterating that Lalit Modi's plea was without merit. The court also directed Lalit Modi to deposit ₹ 1 lakh as costs to the Tata Memorial Hospital within four weeks.
