Bombay High Court
SWAPNIL SUBHASH KOTHARKAR AND ANRversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. THE SEC. DEPT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
There is no right to promotion; the petition is premature and is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners filed a writ petition under Article 226 seeking a mandamus directing the respondents to decide their pending representations and to grant them promotion to senior clerk positions reserved for the EWS category. The court noted that under established service law there is no inherent right to promotion, only a right to be considered for it. Consequently, the petition was deemed premature as the petitioners had not exhausted the procedural avenues for seeking promotion. The court therefore dismissed the petition, though it left open the petitioners' future contentions regarding promotion. No costs were awarded.
Issues considered
- Whether a petitioner has a legal right to promotion under service law.
- Whether a writ of mandamus can be issued to compel the government to decide pending representations.
- Whether interim relief to restrain filling of reserved posts is appropriate.
Subjects
- Article 226
- mandamus
- promotion
- service law
- EWS reservation
- premature petition
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
AJIT
AJIT RAMESH
RAMESH PATHRIKAR
PATHRIKAR Date:
2026.10.07
402-WP-13029-2026.DOC
11:18:54
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 13029 OF 2026
Swapnil Subhash Kotharkar & Anr. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra Throu.
The Sec. Dept Of Rural Development & Ors. ...Respondents
_______
Mr. Sanjeev B. Deore a/w Suchita J. Pawar, Arman Ansari, Shamshad Ali Hashmi
i/b Aditya S. Deore for Petitioners.
Mr. M. P. Thakur for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. Abhijeet V. Jangale for Respondent No.3.
_______
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 5th OCTOBER 2026
P.C.
1. This petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed
praying for the following substantive reliefs:
“(a) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Art
226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
directions/writ/order whereby directing the Respondent No-2 and 3 to decide the
representation dated 21.07.2025, 28.07.2025, 30.07.2026, 03.08.2026, 11.08.2026
and 20.08.2026 (Ex-A) preferred by the Petitioners.
(b) This Hon'ble Court be pleased to exercise the jurisdiction vested in it under Art
226 of Constitution of India and issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate
directions/writ/order whereby directing Respondent No-1 to 3 to give promotion to
the Petitioners as senior clerk against the 03-post reserved for the EWS category.
(c) Pending the hearing and final disposal of the said petition the Respondents be
adhered/stopped from filling/Lapsing of the 03 post of EWS category OR the
Respondent be directed to reserved 02 post of the senior Assistant (clerk) for which
the Petitioners are claiming their promotion.
(d) Interim/ad-interim relief be granted in terms of prayer clause- (C)”
Page 1 of 2
Ajit Pathrikar
402-WP-13029-2026.DOC
2. The case of the Petitioners is that the Petitioners need to be granted
promotion, as clear from the prayers as made in the petition. It is a settled position
of law that there is no right to seek any promotion. There is only a right to be
considered for promotion.
3. In the event that the Petitioners are aggrieved if they are not considered for
promotion, they are at liberty to file appropriate proceedings if so permitted in law.
The present petition certainly premature. It is accordingly rejected, however,
keeping open all contentions of the Petitioners on their contentions on promotion.
4. Disposed of. No costs.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
Ajit Pathrikar
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.