Bombay High Court
Bajrang Limbaji Ayare And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 October, 2023
Author: Mangesh S. Patil
Bench: Mangesh S. Patil
2023:BHC-AUG:22432-DB
WP.13634.18+.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 13634 OF 2018
1] Vinu Shrikrishna Lawar
2] Dilip Shripad Hange
3] Prakash Kisan Lokhande
4] Rajendra Bhau Hile
5] Dnyaneshwar Bhanudas Kshirsagar
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
6] Jayprakash Haribhau Gaikwad
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
7] Babasaheb Kashiram Mali
8] Prashant Shankar Bodake
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
9] Sachin Madhukar Nalawade
10] Satish Balkrishna Jadhav
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
11] Anil Arjunrao Kale
12] Pawan Laxminarayan Kulwal
13] Vivek Pandurang Chimote
14] Dattatraya Arjun Sonwane
15] Vikram Parshuram Kad
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
16] Suresh Ramchandra Zanjare
17] Vijay Ramdas Shelar
18] Mahavirsing Ramchandra Chauhan
19] Chandrakant Baburao Salunke
20] Ulhas Shantaram Surve
21] Uttam Dnyanu Chavan
22] Nandkumar Surendra Kute
23] Rajendra Sadashiv Wagh
24] Vivek Lahanu Kanawade
25] Bhimraj Rangnath Najan
26] Sanjay Dattatraya Mandakmale
27] Popat Pandurang Kadu
28] Vinayak Ramchandra Joshi
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
29] Bapusaheb Dashrath Bhakare
30] Narendra Vitthal Kashid
1/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
31] Dattatraya Bhimaji Lad
32] Nitinkumar Jagannath Ransur
33] Pandit Bhimraj Kharde
34] Sunil Balkrishna Bhanage
35] Krihna Dinkar Chavan
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
36] Rajendra Tatyaram Gaikwad
37] Suresh Shrawan Dodake
38] Ramchandra Raosaheb Perane
39] Babanrao Maruti Ilhe
40] Sunil Rangnath Karad
41] Bapurao Govinda Gaikwada
42] Vijay Janardan Tarade
43] Bharat Taterao Kolgane
44] Kumar Vishnu Gurav
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
45] Dr. Vishnu Kundlik Garande
46] Abasaheb Babasaheb Mohite
47] Avinash Sakharam Bhosale
48] Agnelo Pedru Fernandes
49] Bhagwan Bapu Gawade
50] Bhimram Madhukar Kamble
51] Shailendra Shankarrao Kamble
52] Dinkar Keshav Kamble
53] Sangram Sahebrao Dhumal
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
54] Sampat Shankarrao Kolape
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
55] Dhananjay Shankarrao Navadkar
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
56] Mohan Baburao Shete
57] Sanjay Sampatrao Bhosale
58] Bharat Dattatraya Tamboli
59] Gangadhar Dada Patil
60] Swati Sahebrao Khandave
61] Pandurang Namdeo Shendage
62] Abdul Aziz Abdul Razzak Shaikh
63] Deepak Vitthalrao Dahat
64] Shivaji Tulsiram Pachpute
65] Uttam Bapurao Hole
66] Tukram Shankar Bhondave
67] Subhash Ganpat Bhalekar
68] Bhimrao Vasant Gondhali
69] Shahaji Kakasaheb Shinde
70] Nilkanth Bapusaheb More
2/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
71] Rajendra Mohan Gethe
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
72] Vishwanath Anant Shinde
73] Jaywant Dadaji Jadhav
74] Ashok Sidaray Jadhav
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
75] Kailas Jayram Kamble
76] Hemant Manohar Patil
77] Ashok Anantrao Pisal
78] Chandrashekhar Vasant Pujari
79] Ritu Satish Thakare
80] Murlidhar Shantaram Mahajan
81] Hemant Tukaram Patil
82] Deepak Damodhar Dudhade
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
83] S.H. Pathan
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
84] Sanjay Baburao Gawade
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
85] Mohan Shankar Shirke
86] Sunil Krishna Kambale
87] Bhausaheb Vishwanath Pagire
88] Madhav Manohar Desai
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
89] Dattatraya Vithoba Kusalkar
90] Uddhav Yeshvantrao Bhoite
91] Baban Bhau Khutal
92] Dr. Jitendra Kashinath Dhemre
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
93] Tulshidas Baliram Bastewad
94] Suryabhan Savitra Ilhe
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 07-09-2021)
95] Dr. Amolic Viju Laxman
96] Dr. Mahanand Shivajirao Mane
97] Nazimuddin Badruddin Shaikh
98] Dr. Anilkumar Govindrao Bhoite
99] Dr. Arun Bhaurao Kamble
100] Dr. Madhukar Rajaram Bedis ... Petitioners
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through the Principal Secretary for
Agriculture, Animal Husbandry,
3/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
Dairy Development and Fisheries
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai
2] Mahatma Phule Krishi Vidyapeeth
Rahuri, Tq. Rahuri
District Ahmednagar
Through its Registrar .. Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12943 OF 2021 IN WP/13634/2018
(VINU SHRIKRISHNA LAWAR & OTHERS
VS.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.)
...
Mr. V. D. Hon Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. A. D. Sonkawade i/b. Mr. A. V. Hon -
Advocate for petitioner,
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent no. 1,
Mr. Parag P. Shahane a/w. Mr. P. L. Shahane - Advocate for Respondent
No. 2
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6428 OF 2021
1] Dr. Bajrang Limbaji Ayare
2] Dr. Santosh Vishnu Sawardekar
3] Dr. Vijay Gopal More
4] Dr. Sanjaykumar Ramchandra Torane
5] Dr. Prakash Bhaskar Sanap
6] Dr. Ashok Kumar Parshuram Chavan
7] Vinayak Narayan Jalgaonkar
8] Dr. Rakesh Chokhoba Gajbhiye
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 03-12-2021)
9] Dr. Atul Ganeshrao Mohod
10] Dr. Somnath Pralhad Sonawane
11] Dr. Sachinkumar Bhagwan Nandgude
12] Vijay Vitthal Aware
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 03-12-2021)
4/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
13] Dr. Sandeepkumar Sumerchand Jain
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 03-12-2021)
14] Dr. Shrikant Baslingappa Swami
15] Dr. Suresh Bhagwan Dodake
16] Dr. Anand Lalba Narangalkar
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 03-12-2021)
17] Mahadev Jagannath Mane
(Deleted as per Court's Order dated 03-12-2021)
18] Dr. Pradip Chandrakant Haldavnekar
19] Dr. Mrs.Pushpa Dilip Patil
20] Dr. Anil Sawalaram Pawase
21] Dr. Prafulla Chandrakant Mali
22] Dr. Ramesh Laxman Kunkerkar ... Petitioners
Versus
01] The State of Maharashtra
Through the Principal Secretary for
Agriculture, Animal Husbandry,
Dairy Development and Fisheries
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai
02] Dr. Balasaheb Sawant Konkan Krishi
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Dapoli
Tq. Dapoli, District - Ratnigiri
Through its Registrar ... Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12721 OF 2021 IN WP/6428/2021
(BAJRANG LIMBAJI AYARE & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
& ANR.)
...
Mr. V. D. Hon Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. A. D. Sonkawade i/b. Mr. A. V. Hon -
Advocate for petitioner,
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent no. 1,
Mr. Sameer K, Sawant - Advocate for Respondent No. 2
WITH
5/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
WRIT PETITION NO. 7859 OF 2021
1] Dr. Rajendra Ganpatrao Deshmukh
2] Dr. Santosh Janardan Gahurkar
3] Dr. Vijaykumar Lachapatrao Gawande
4] Rajabhau Laxman Isal
5] Dr. Arvind Munjajirao Sonkamble
6] Smt. Priti Arvind Sonkamble
7] Dr. Surendra Rajaram Patil
8] Dr. Abhay Prakash Wagh
9] Dr. Vijay Punjabrao Mane
10] Dr. Ajay Krishnakumar Sadawarte
11] Dr. Rajendra Narayan Katkar
12] Sukhadeo Sitaram Tayade
13] Dr. Chandrakant Uttamrao Patil
14] Dr. Sanjay Bapuji Sakhare
15] Prakash Ambadas Gite
16] Dr. Dinkar Tryambakrao Deshmukh
17] Dr. Yogesh Deonathrao Charjan
18] Avinash Vithal Gajakos
19] Dr. Pramod Haribhau Bakane
20] Dr. Shyam Motiraoji Ghawade
21] Dr. Narayan Muralidhar Kale
22] Dr. Sheshrao Dawada Chavan
23] Dr. Sanjay Shrawan Wanjari
24] Dr. Surendra Rambhau Kalbande
25] Dr. Ishvar Lakhichand Pardeshi
26] Rajendra Dinkar Walke
27] Dr. Anita Bhagwantrao Chorey
28] Pundlik Namdeorao Sapkal
29] Dr. Kishor Janardanrao Kubde
30] Dr. Anil Bhagwantrao Turkhede
31] Dr. Shashank Govindrao Bharad
32] Dr. Archana Wasudeorao Thorat
33] Dr. Nilkanth Ramchandra Potdukhe
34] Dr. Rameshwar Baliram Ghorade
35] Dr. Vishnukant Suryabhan Tekale
36] Dr. Nitin Kashiram Patke
37] Dr. Dilip Bhagwan Patil
38] Dr. Mohan Vyankati Totawar
39] Dr. Vijay Sakharam Kale
40] Dr. Jayant Punjabrao Deshmukh
41] Dr. Anil P. Karunakar
42] Dr. Vijay Vitthalrao Gabhane
43] Dr. Rajesh Shankarrao Patole
6/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
44] Diwakar Pandhari Wahile
45] Dr. Shridhar Shankarrao Rewatkar
46] Dr. Sandip Prabhudas Lambe
47] Dr. Pankaj Prakashchandra Bhople
48] Dr. Varsha Vijayrao Tapre
49] Dr. Eknath Rangnath Vaidya
50] Dr. Mahendra Muralidhar Deshmukh
51] Dr. Suchita Vikaskumar Gupta
52] Dr. Kishor Dhanpal Gharde
53] Dr. Santosh Pundlik Divekar
54] Dr. Sanjay Manikrao Bhoyar
55] Dr. Pramod Kundlikrao Wakle
56] Dr. Ashok Nathu Patil
57] Rajesh Devidasrao Ghorpade
58] Dr. Shyam Dalsingh Jadhao
59] Nitin Subodh Gupta
60] Dr. Govindsing Gopalsing Jadhav
61] Dr. Ishwar Mahadeo Nagarare
62] Dr. Vinod Gulabrao Nagdeote
63] Dr. Gautam Rambhau Shamkuwar
64] Dr. Ommala Deorao Kchanwar
65] Mahendra Krishna Moon
66] Dr. Nishant Vasantrao Shende
67] Dr. Nitin Ramesh Koshti
68] Dr. Wachandas Parmanand Badole
69] Dr. Arun Sheshrao Ingole
70] Rambhau Wamanrao Gawande
71] Dr. Milind Kisan Rathod
72] Vilas Sahadeorao Telgote
73] Dr. Shrikant Balasaheb Brahmankar
74] Dr. Vilas Gulabrao Atkare
75] Dr. Prema Ravindra Manapure
76] Dr. Vijaykumar Shriram Khawale
77] Dr. Vilas Jairam Tambe
78] Dr. Ramakant Pundlikrao Gajbhiye
79] Dr. Vinod Uttamrao Raut
80] Dr. Purushottam Sheshrao Neharkar
81] Dr. Ravindra Shankarrao Waghmare
82] Dr. Prashant Vasantrao Shende
83] Dr. Vijay Mahadeo Ilorkar
84] Dr. Shrikant Baliram Amarshettiwar
85] Dr. Devanand Modka Panchabhai
86] Dr. Pramod Venkatrao Yadgirwar ... Petitioners
Versus
7/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
01] State of Maharashtra through its
Secretary, Department of Agriculture,
Animal Husbandry, Dairy Development
and Fisheries, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
02] Maharashtra Council of Agricultural
Education and Research, through its
Director General, 132-B, Bhamburda,
Bhosale Nagar, Pune 411 007
03] Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Krushi
Vidyapeeth, Akola through its
Registrar, Krushi Nagar, Akola ... Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9407 OF 2021 IN WP/7859/2021
(DR. RAJENDRA GANPATRAO DESHMUKH & ORS.
VS. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.)
...
Mr. B. G. Kulkarni & Mr. N. B. Khandare - Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent no. 1,
Mr. S. K. Kadam - Advocate for Respondent No. 2
Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni - Advocate for Respondent No. 3
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 10687 OF 2022
1] Dr. Krishna S/o Dinkar Chavan
2] Sampat S/o Shankarrao Kolpe
3] Dr. Nilkanth Bapusaheb More
4] Dr. Vinayak Ramchandra Joshi
5] Dr. Deepak S/o Deamodar Dudhade
6] Dr. Rajendra S/o Mohan Gethe
7] Dr. Ashok S/o Sidram Jadhav
8] Dr. Sarfrajkhan Habibkhan Pathan
9] Dr. Jitendra S/o Kashinath Dehmre
10] Dr. Suryabhan S/o Savita Ilhe
11] Dr. Madhav S/o Manohar Desai
12] Dr. Jotiram S/o Bhimrao Shinde
8/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
13] Dr. Mukund Tanhaji Bhingarde ... Petitioners
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through the Principal Secretary
For Agriculture, Animal Husbandry
Dairy Development and Fisheries
Department, Mantralaya,
Mumbai
2] Mahatma Phule Krushi Vidyapeeth
Rahuri, Tq. Rahuri
District Ahmednagar
Through its Registrar .. Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 7070 OF 2023 IN WP/10687/2022
(DR. KRISHNA DINKAR CHAVAN & ORS. VS.
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.)
...
Mr. V. D. Hon Sr. Counsel a/w Mr. A. D. Sonkawade i/b. Mr. A. V. Hon -
Advocate for petitioner,
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent no. 1,
Mr. Parag P. Shahane a/w. Mr. P. L. Shahane - Advocate for Respondent
No. 2
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6274 OF 2023
Shrikant S/o Keshavrao Aherkar ... Petitioner
Versus
1] The Vice Chancellor, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, Krishi Nagar,
Akola - 444 001
2] The Dean (Agriculture) and Director of
Instructions, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola - 444 001
3] The Registrar, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, Krishi Nagar,
Akola - 444 001.
9/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
4] The Auditor and Comptroller,
Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Akola, Krishi Nagar, Akola - 444 001
5] The Pay and Accounts Officer,
Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth,
Akola, Krishi Nagar, Akola - 444 001
6] The Head of the Department of
Entomology, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, Krishi Nagar,
Akola - 444 001. ... Respondents
...
Mr. D. M. Kale a/w Gazala Shaikh, Sarvesh Puddatwar - Advocate for
petitioner
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent/State.
Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni - Advocate for Respondent No. 4
...
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13858 OF 2018
1] Dr. Rakesh Dnyandeo Ahire
2] Shri. Bhalchandra Vithalrao Patil
3] Dr. Sunil Sheshrao Mane
4] Dr. Sanjeev Dhondiba Bantewad
5] Dr. Deepak Khanderao Patil
6] Dr. Kiran Tukaram Jadhav
7] Dr. Raosaheb Gangaram Bhagyawant
8] Dr. Sunildutt Rajeshwar Jakkawad
9] Dr. Suryakant Baburao Pawar
10] Shri. Raosaheb Sampatrao Raut
11] Dr. R.C. Mahajan
12] Dr. A.A. Bharose
13] Dr. P.N. Karanjikar
14] Shri A.V. Gutte
15] Dr. D.S. Perke
16] Dr. B.M. Thombre
17] Dr. V.S. Khandare
18] Dr. D.S. Chauhan
19] Dr. R.B. Kshirgar
20] Dr. Shivaji Sayalu Yadlod
21] Dr. V.M. Bhosle
22] Dr. K.S. Gadhe
23] Prof. S.L. Badgujar
10/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
24] Dr. H.M. Syed
25] Prof. H.W. Deshpande
26] Dr. K.S. Baig
27] Dr. Udhav Nilabhanu Alse
28] Dr. K.T. Apet
29] Prof. Santosh Haibati Kamble
30] Dr. G.K. Londhe
31] Dr. H.V. Kalpande
32] A.K. Gore
33] Dr. V.K. Khargakharate
34] Shivaji Pandurang Mehtre ... Petitioners
Versus
1] The State of Maharashtra
through Principal Secretary,
Agriculture, Animal Husbandry,
Dairy Development and Fisheries
Department, Mantralay, Mumbai
2] Vasantrao Naik Marathwada
Agriculture University, Parbhani
through Registrar ... Respondents
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 9299 OF 2021 IN WP/13858/2018
(DR. RAKESH DNYANDEO AHIRE & ORS. VS. THE STATE OF
MAHARASHTRA & ANR.)
WITH
CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 12269 OF 2022 IN WP/13858/2018
(THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA VS. DR. RAKESH DNYANDEO AHIRE
AND ORS.)
...
Mr. N. B. Khandare - Advocate for petitioner
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent/State.
Mr. M. N. Nawandar - Advocate for Respondent No. 2
...
WITH
11/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
WRIT PETITION NO. 6275 OF 2023
Dr. Arun Sheshrao Ingole ... Petitioners
Versus
1] The Principal Secretary,
Agriculture, Animals Husbandry,
Dairy Development and Fisheries Department
State of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Annexe,
Mumbai - 400 032.
2] The Principal Secretary of Finance
Department, State of Maharashtra, 5th Floor,
Mantralaya, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Madam Kama Road, Mumbai - 400 032
3] The Director General of MCAER, Pune,
Office at 132/B, Bhamburda, Bhosale Nagar,
Pune - 411 007
4] The Joint Secretary of Agriculture, Animal,
Dairy & Fishery Department, State of
Maharashtra, Madam Kama Road, Annex,
5th Floor, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400 032
5] The Vice Chancellor, Dr. Panjabrao
Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola,
at Post Krishi Nagar, Akola - 444 104 (M.S.)
6] The Registrar, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, At Post Krishi
Nagar,
Akola - 444 104 (M.S.)
7] The Comptroller, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, At Post Krishi Nagar,
Akola - 444 104 (M.S.) ... Respondents
...
Mr. D. M. Kale a/w Gazala Shaikh, Sarvesh Puddatwar - Advocate for
petitioner
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent/State.
Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni - Advocate for Respondent No. 7
...
12/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 6276 OF 2023
1] Shri Rambhau Wamanrao Gawande
2] Dr. Rajendra Ganpatrao Deshmukh
3] Dr. Chandrakant Uttamrao Patil
4] Dr. Ashok Nathu Patil
5] Dr. Sanjay Shrawan Wanjari
6] Shri. Mahendra Krishna Moon ... Petitioners
Versus
1] The Principal Secretary, Agriculture,
Animals Husbandry, Dairy Development
and Fisheries Department, State of Maharashtra
Mantralaya, Annexe, Mumbai - 400 032
2] The Principal Secretary of Finance
Department, State of Maharashtra,
5th Floor, Mantralaya, Hutatma Rajguru Chowk,
Madam Kama Road, Mumbai - 400 032
3] The Director General of MCAER, Pune
Office at 132/B, Bhamburda, Bhosale
Nagar, Pune - 411 007
4] The Joint Secretary of Agriculture,
Animal, Dairy & Fishery Department,
State of Maharashtra, Madam Kama
Road, Annex, 5th Floor, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 400 032
5] The Vice Chancellor, Dr. Panjabrao
Deshmukh Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola,
At Post Krishi Nagar, Akola - 444 104 (M.S.)
6] The Registrar, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola, At Post Krishi Nagar,
Akola - 444 104 (M.S.)
7] The Comptroller, Dr. Panjabrao Deshmukh
Krishi Vidyapeeth, Akola At Post
Krishi Nagar, Akola - 444 104 (M.S.) ... Respondents
...
Mr. D. M. Kale a/w Gazala Shaikh, Sarvesh Puddatwar - Advocate for
petitioner
Mr. A. V. Anturkar, Sr. Counsel (Special Counsel) i/b. Mr. P. S. Patil -
Additional Government Pleader for State Respondent/State.
Mrs. Rashmi S. Kulkarni - Advocate for Respondent No. 7
...
13/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL &
SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.
RESERVED ON : 11 AUGUST 2023
PRONOUNCED ON: 18 OCTOBER 2023
JUDGMENT (MANGESH S. PATIL, J.) :
Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned senior advocates and learned advocates representing the different petitioners and the respondents in all these petitions. Though the petitions have been filed at different benches, those have been clubbed and assigned to this bench since these involve same issue.
2. The common issue that arises for consideration in all these matters is as to if the petitioners who have been serving as associate professors in the respondent agricultural universities from across the state are entitled to the revision of their pay scale pursuant to the communication received from the Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development addressed to the Secretary of the University Grants Commission (UGC) on 31.12.2008, at par with the teachers from the same category in the universities of the Central Government, on the recommendations of the sixth pay commission.
3. On 28.02.2009 UGC addressed a letter to the Education Secretary of all the States for undertaking revision of pay of the teachers according to 6th pay recommendations.
4. The Government of India through the Ministry of Agriculture issued a communication to the Chief Secretaries of the State on 14/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt 13.03.2009 regarding revision of salaries of the teachers of the State Agricultural universities. Based on that the Government of Maharashtra through Ministry of Agriculture published a detailed Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 directing revision of pay of the teachers like the petitioners who are the assistant professors in the agricultural universities in the State receiving government aid and affiliated in accordance with the UGC regulations.
5. The Government Resolution of the State Government dated 18.03.2010 inter alia provided Appendix I, in respect of the assistant professor (selection grade) / associate professor. It provided at serial no. 3 and 4 as under :-
Sr Pre-revised Revised Function of Incumbents/ New Entrants no. designation / Designation/Pay Band pay scale + AGP
3. Assistant Prof Asststant Professor i) Incumbent Assistant Professor (Selection (Selection Grade) / (Selection Grade) / Associate Professor Grade) / Associate Professor not competed 3 years on 01.01.2006 Associate Prof : (till they complete 3 shall be fixed at the appropriate stage in 12000-420- years) / Assistant P.B. - 15600-39100 with AGP 8000 till 18300 (Not Professor : they complete 3 years in 12000-18300, completed 3 15600-39100+ AGP and thereafter shall be placed in PB-
years on 8000 37400-67000 with AGP of 9000 and
01.01.06) redesignated as Associate Professor.
ii) Assistant Professors after completion
of 5 years in AGP 7000 on satisfying the
eligibility conditions laid down by the
UGC/ICAR from time to time.
4. Assistant Associate Professor: i) Incumbent Assistant Professors
Professor 37400-67000 (Selection Grade)/ Associate
(Selection + AGP 9000 Professors completed 3 years on 1.1.06
Grade)/ in the scale of 12000-420-18300, shall
Associate be placed in P.B.-
Professor:12000- 37400-67000 with AGP 9000 and re-
420-8300 designated as Associate Professor.
(Completed 3 ii) Assistant Professors after completion
years of 3 years in AGP 8000 on satisfying the
on 1.1.06) eligibility conditions laid down by the
UGC from time to time.
15/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
6. On 20.09.2010, a corrigendum was issued in respect of Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 and in paragraph no. 9(ii), it was stated that it should be read as 01.01.2006 to 31.03.2010 and Appendix I-A was added. The relevant correction in respect of entry at serial no. 8 of the Government Resolution provided as under :-
Sr Name of Existing Pay Scale Eligibility Revised Pay Band no Post shown in M.C.S (Revised pay) Rules, 1998
8. Associate 1) 12000-420-18300 Associate Professor 37400-67000 Professor as on 1.1.2006 & +9000 (Grade pay) also directly selected or promoted thereafter
2) 12000-420-18300 Completed 3 years 37400-67000 in AGP Rs. 9000 +10000 (Grade pay) with Ph.D Accordingly the petitioners' scales were revised and they were all fixed in the scale of 37,400-67,000 + 10,000 GP.
7. It is necessary to note that some of the petitioners have withdrawn the writ petitions and the facts can be collated as under :-
Details of Writ Petitions Sr Writ Petition no. Name of State Agricultural Total petitioners no Universities
1. 13634/ 2018 MPKV (Rahuri) 80 (100-20) (Aurangabad bench) 20 petitioners have withdrawn
2. 6428/ 2021 BSKKV (Dapoli) 17 (22-5) (Bombay) 5 petitioners have withdrawn 3. 1385/ 2018 VNMKV (Parbhani) 34 (Aurangabad bench)
4. 7859/ 2021 Dr. PDKV (Akola) 84 (86-2) (Aurangabad bench) 2 petitioners have withdrawn the WP 16/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt
5. 6274/ 2023 As above Shrikant keshavrao (Nagpur bench) Aherkar
6. 6275/ 2023 As above Arun Sheshrao Ingole (Nagpur bench) 7. 6276/ 2023 As above 6 (Nagpur bench)
8. On 24.08.2018 the State government through the Agricultural department cancelled the corrigendum and directed the recoveries to be made from the petitioners and similarly situated persons. Aggrieved thereby, these petitions.
9. The learned senior advocate Mr. Hon, Mr. Kale, Mr. Khandare and Mr. Kulkarni for the petitioners would submit that the Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 issued by the State government was regarding pay structure of different categories of teachers which was to be implemented in accordance with the sixth pay commission recommendation with effect from 01.01.2006. Those posts included the Assistant Professors / Associate Professors / Professors in colleges and universities. Since the petitioners are directly recruited they were governed by clause 2(a)(i), (viii) and (xiv) and were not governed by clause 2(a)(ix) and (x). They would therefore submit that the petitioners' pay has been revised in accordance with the Government Resolution and the impugned action of recoveries is clearly illegal and could not have been revised by resorting cancellation ex post facto.
10. Per contra, the learned senior advocate Mr. Anturkar for the State who appears as a special counsel submits that by the Government of India vide communication dated 31.12.2008 and 13.03.2009 had 17/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt informed the State of Maharashtra that if it so wanted it could adopt and implement the pay scale provided therein as framed by the Central Government and in that case, the Central Government will undertake the financial obligation to the tune of 80% till 31.03.2010. He would submit that it was expressly informed to the State that the scheme was to be implemented as it is and without any modification. He would submit that the Centrally sponsored scheme was to be implemented strictly in the letter and spirit. The Central government was to bear 80% of the financial obligation only upto 31.03.2010. He would submit that corrigendum dated 20.09.2010 was issued without seeking concurrence of the finance department as is required by the Rules of Business framed under Article 166 of the Constitution of India. The error was sought to be rectified by issuing impugned communication dated 24.08.2018. The petitioners had derived the financial benefit due to such wrong pay fixation to which they were never entitled to and the impugned action merely seeks to make recoveries of the money to which they were not entitled to.
11. Mr. Anturkar would submit that the petitioners had executed undertakings to refund the excess payments received if it was so found at a later point. Those undertakings were given in accordance with the relevant clause from the basic G.R. dated 18.03.2010. The situation would be covered by High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others Vs. Jagdev Singh; (2016) 14 SCC 267. Even if they claim to fall under 18/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt specific category laid down in the matter of The State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) AIR 2015 SC 696 , those directions cannot be made equally applicable to all the petitioners. If at all they claim to be entitled to derive some benefit from the categories of cases contemplated therein, it is the prerogative of the State. They are supposed to make representation as contemplated therein which the State Government may consider on its own merits depending upon the fact situation and on case to case basis. He would submit that the petitioners who are holding the higher posts in the agricultural universities cannot claim any inherent right to retain the money received wrongfully. If they were not entitled to the revision of the pay scale and still have been able to recover something due to wrong pay fixation, the State government being the employer can certainly seek to make the recoveries.
12. We have considered the submissions and perused the record. Admittedly, the recommendations of the 6th pay commission were made applicable to the State Agricultural Universities and two affiliated colleges by Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010. It also provided Appendix I. Since the controversy revolves around the revision of the pay of the persons from the cadre of Associate Professor, the relevant extract of the GR contained in clause 2 (viii) to (xiv) would be relevant and which read as under :
"(viii) Posts of Associate Professor shall be in the Pay Band of 19/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt Rs.37400-67000, with AGP of Rs.9000. Directly recruited Associate Professors shall be placed in the Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with an AGP of Rs.9000, at the appropriate stage in the Pay Band in terms of the conditions of appointment.
(ix) Incumbent Associate Professors and Assistant professors (Selection Grade) who have completed 3 years in the current pay scale of Rs.12000-18300 on 1.1.2006 shall be placed in Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with AGP Pay of Rs.9000 and shall be re-designated as Associate Professor.
(x) Incumbent Associate Professors and Assistant professors (Selection Grade) who had not completed three years in the pay scale of Rs. 12000-18300 on 1.1.2006 shall be placed at the appropriate stage in the Pay Band of Rs.15600-39100 with AGP of Rs.8000 till they complete 3 years of service in the grade of Assistant professors (Selection Grade) Associate Professors, and thereafter shall be placed in the higher Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 and accordingly re-designated as Associate Professor.
(xi) Associate Professors and Assistant Professors (Selection Grade) in service at present shall continue to be designated as Assistant Professor (Selection Grade) or Associate Professor, as the case may be, until they are placed in the Pay Band of Rs.37,400-67000 and re-designated as Associate Professor in the manner described in (x) above
(xii) Assistant Professors completing 3 years of teaching in the AGP of Rs.8000 shall be eligible, subject to other conditions that may be prescribed by the UGC/ICAR and the university, to move to the Pay Band of Rs.37400-67000 with AGP of Rs.9000 and to be designated as Associate Professor.
(xiii) Associate Professor completing 3 years of service in the AGP of Rs.9000 and possessing a Ph.D degree in the discipline shall be eligible to be appointed and designated as Professor, subject to other conditions of academic performance as laid down by the UGC/ICAR and if any by the university. No teacher other than those with a Ph.D. shall be promoted, appointed or designated as Professor.
The Pay Band for the post of Professors shall be Rs.37400- 67000 with AGP of Rs. 10000.
(xiv) The pay of a directly recruited Professor shall be fixed at a stage not below Rs.43000 in the Pay Band of Rs.37400- 20/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt 67000, with the applicable AGP of Rs.10000."
Table showing Pre-revised Designations/ Pay Scales and corresponding Designations/Pay bands and Academic Grade Pay (AGP) as on and from 1st January 2006 for University/College Teachers and Other personnel in University/College contained in Appendix I are as under :
Sr Pre-revised Revised Function of Incumbents/ New Entrants no. designation / Designation/Pay Band pay scale + AGP
1. Assistant Assistant Professor : i) Incumbent Assistant Professor shall be Professor 8000- 15600-39100+ AGP fixed at the appropriate stage in P.B. -
275-13500 6000 15600-39100 with AGP 6000
2. Assistant Associate Professor: i) Incumbent Assistant Professor
Professor (Senior 15600-39100 (Senior Scale) shall be fixed at the
Scale)10000- + AGP 7000 appropriate stage in P.B. -15600- 39100
325-15200 with AGP 7000
ii) Assistant Professors after completion
of 4 years for those possessing Ph.D at
entry level., 5 years possessing
M.Phil/M.Tech. Etc. at entry level and 6
years for others (without
Ph.D./M.Phil.etc) in AGP 6000 on
satisfying the eligibility conditions laid
down by the UGC/ICAR from time to
time.
3. Assistant Assistant Professor i) Incumbent Assistant Professor
Professor (Selection (Selection Grade)/Associate Professor
(Selection Grade)/Associate not competed 3 years on 01.01.2006
Grade)/Associate Professor (till they shall be fixed at the appropriate stage in
Professor : complete 3 years)/ P.B. - 15600-39100 with AGP 8000 till
12000-420- Assistant Professor: they complete 3 years in 12000-18300,
18300 (Not 15600-39100+AGP and thereafter shall be placed in PB -
completed 3 8000 37400-67000 with AGP of 9000 and
years on redesignated as Associate Professor.
01.01.2006) ii) Assistant Professors after completion
of 5 years in AGP 7000 on satisfying the
eligibility conditions laid down by the
UGC/ICAR from time to time.
4. Assistant Associate Professor : i) Incumbent Assistant Professors
Professor 37400-67000 + AGP (Selection Grade)/Associate Professors
(Selection 9000 completed 3 years on 01.01.06 in the
Grade)/Associate scale of 12000-420-18300, shall be
Professor : placed in P.B.-37400-67000 with AGP
12000-420- 9000 and re-designated as Associate
18300 Professor.
(Completed 3
years on ii) Assistant Professors after competition
01.01.06) of 3 years in AGP 8000 on satisfying the
eligibility conditions laid down by the
UGC from time to time.
21/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
13. The learned advocates for the petitioners made endeavour to demonstrate clause 2(a)(viii) to (xiv) (supra) and particularly emphasized clause (viii) to buttress their submissions that the petitioners being the directly recruited associate professors have been correctly fixed in the revised pay band of Rs.37400-67000 with AGP of Rs.9000. As against which Mr. Anturkar would interpret these clauses to bring home his point that the Associate Professors were mandatorily required to complete three years of service in the grade of Assistant Professors (Selection Grade)/Associate Professors in the pay band of Rs.15600-
39100 with AGP of Rs.8000/-. It is only after completion of three years in that pay band that such Associates Professors could be placed in the higher pay band of 37400-67000.
14. As can be seen, clause (viii) is in the form of a declaration that the post of Associate Professor would fall in the pay band of 37400- 67000. Further clause (xii) if read conjointly with clause (viii) would demonstrate that any person appointed as an Assistant Professor for first three years has to be placed in the pay band of Rs.15600-39100 with AGP of Rs.8000. Those who have already completed three years as on 01.01.2006 would be placed in the pay band of 37400-67000 with AGP of 9000. Those who had not completed three years as on 01.01.2006 would continue to be placed in the pay band 15600-39100 with AGP of 8000 till they would complete three years and thereafter would be placed in the higher pay band of 37400-67000 with AGP of 9000. 22/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
15. Admittedly, this Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 with Appendix - I, inter alia laid down rules for fixation of pay in the revised pay band and fixation pay in the revised scale after 01.01.2006. In clause 5 it contained a table shown pre-revised designation/pay scales and corresponding designation/pay band and Academic Grade Pay (AGP) as on and from 01.01.2006 (supra). If the entries at serial Nos.1 to 4 are carefully examined, the aforementioned inference would be fully corroborated from the last column to the effect that it is only after completion of three years on the post of Assistant Professor (Selection Grade)/Associate Professor for a period of three years in the pay band of 12000-420-18300 they have to be placed in the pay band of 37400- 67000 with AGP 9000. Therefore, a plain reading of these provisions from the basic Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 as understood in the light of Appendix-I is sufficient to negate the attempt of the petitioner to demonstrate that they were entitled to be fixed in the revised pay scale of 37400-67000 with AGP of 9000 on 01.01.2006. Though the revised pay scale for the post of Assistant Professor with effect from 01.01.2006 was to be that much, it was incumbent on the part of the persons like the petitioners to have completed three years of service in the pre-revised scale of 12000-420-18300.
16. The corrigendum dated 20.09.2010 was issued by the Agriculture, Animal Husbandry, Dairy Department and Fisheries Department of the Government of Maharashtra thereby adding Appendix 23/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt
- I-A to the basic Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010. As is pointed out herein above the entry No.8 from Appendix-I-A would read that in respect of the Assistant Professors the existing payscale according to the 5th Pay commission which was 12000-420-18300, was shown to be revised to 37,400-67,000 with grade pay of 9000 to all the incumbent Assistant Professor as on 01.01.2006 and also directly selected or promoted thereafter and on completion of three years in that scale possessing Ph.D were shown to be entitled to the same pay band but with grade pay of 10000/-. Ex facie, this Appendix-I-A was running contrary to the basic GR and particularly the clauses 2 (viii) to 2 (xiv).
17. It is, therefore, quite clear that the corrigendum dated 20.09.2010 in all probability was issued by the concerned department of the State Government which led to the chaos. It is in view of such corrigendum and not otherwise that the petitioners have been claiming and also were paid in the revised pay scale ignoring this mandatory requirement contained in the basic GR dated 18.03.2010 requiring the incumbent Associate Professors to put in three years in the pay scale of 12000-420-18300.
18. In order to overcome and rectify such error the Government issued the impugned order dated 24.08.2018 thereby revoking the corrigendum dated 20.09.2010. Consequent thereto the Agricultural Universities issued circulars expressly directing that the Associate Professors who had not completed three years in the pay scale of 12000- 24/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt 420-18300 whose pays was revised and fixed in the scale of 37400-67000 with AGP 9000 to be recovered.
19. The stand of the State Government that the corrigendum dated 20.09.2010 was issued without the approval of the Finance Department as was mandatorily required by the Maharashtra Government Rules of Business and Instructions issued under. Clause 2 and 3 of Article 166 of the Constitution of India has not been controverted by the petitioners. Obviously, though there cannot be any dispute about the legality of the Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010, as far as the corrigendum is concerned, apparently it was issued without concurrence of the Finance Department as is required by Rule 48 of the Maharashtra Government Rules of Business and Instructions framed under Article 166 (2) of the Constitution of India. By the impugned Government decision dated 24.08.2018, this corrigendum has been revoked.
20. Independently, as is mentioned in herein above, the Assistant Professor (Selection Grade)/Associate Professors were not entitled to be fixed in the revised pay scale under the 6 th Pay Commission in the pay band of 37400-67000 with GP of 9000 without putting in three years irrespective of the fact that they were in pay scale of 12000-420-18300 or in the pay scale of 15600-39100 and were not entitled to the revised pay scale directly of 37400-67000. The impugned decision of the Government which was even otherwise having the legal infirmity in the form of want 25/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt of previous approval of the Finance Department and was merely a departmental circular, the action to revoke it to set right the things cannot be legally questioned. It is not that something to which the petitioners were otherwise entitled to was being taken away. We find no legal infirmity in the impugned order.
21. Incidentally this last observation is being resorted to as a reasoning by Mr. Anturkar to buttress his submission that in the peculiar circumstances of the present matters even the petitioners cannot derive the benefit of the decision in the matter of Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra). He would submit that once it is found that the petitioners have received something to which they were never entitled to, it would be a matter of unjust enrichment. The petitioners are from group A cadre, highly qualified and had even undertaken to refund the amount if it was erroneously paid to them during pay fixation. He would submit that even otherwise, the excess payment made to the petitioners due to wrong pay fixation would be recovered from the arrears to be paid to them in the subsequent pay fixation according to the 7 th Pay Commission. Even it would be a prerogative of the State, taking into consideration the peculiar facts and circumstances qua each of these petitioners and similarly placed persons but the petitioners in no way can derive the benefit from Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra).
22. Per contra, Mr. Hon, Mr. Kulkarni, Mr. Khandare and Mr. Kale for the petitioners would submit that Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra) 26/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt lays down various categories of the cases and even it is mentioned therein that those categories are not exhaustive. Group C and Group D employees is only one of the categories. Some of the petitioners have superannuated and would also be governed by the other categories.
23. True it is that even prior to Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra) the issue regarding recoveries to be made from the employees in respect of the excess payment made during pay fixation were dealt with and all those matters were considered in the matter of Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra). However, simultaneously one cannot lose site of the fact that the field occupied by Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra) subsequently was also a matter of consideration by the Supreme Court in the case of High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others Vs. Jagdev Singh; (2016) 14 SCC 267.
24. Suffice for the purpose to observe that the basic Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 inter alia expressly provided in clause 11(iv) that an undertaking shall be taken from every beneficiary under the scheme to the effect that any excess payment made on account of incorrect fixation of pay in the revised Pay Bands or grant of inappropriate Pay Band/Academic Grade Pay or any other excess payment made shall be adjustable against the future payments due or otherwise to the beneficiary in the same manner as provided in HRD Ministry's O.M. No. F.23-7/2008-IFD dated 23.10.2008 read with Ministry of Finance (Department of Expenditure) O.M. No.F.1-1/2008-IC dated 27/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt 30.08.2008, which was annexed as Appendix - III. All the petitioners and several similarly situated persons whose pays were revised pursuant to this Government Resolution dated 18.03.2010 were bound by this clause and have executed requisite undertakings. If such is the state of affairs, the petitioners' case would stand on a different footing as compared to the iniquitous recoveries in the situations covered by Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra). This is what precisely is the ratio of Jagdev Singh (supra). Paragraph Nos.10 to 13 are relevant and read as under ;
10. In State of Punjab & Ors etc. vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc. (AIR 2015 SC 696) this Court held that while it is not possible to postulate all situations of hardship where payments have mistakenly been made by an employer, in the following situations, a recovery by the employer would be impermissible in law:
"(i) Recovery from employees belonging to Class-III and Class-IV service (or Group 'C' and Group 'D' service).
(ii) Recovery from retired employees, or employees who are due to retire within one year, of the order of recovery.
(iii) Recovery from employees, when the excess payment has been made for a period in excess of five years, before the order of recovery is issued.
(iv) Recovery in cases where an employee has wrongfully been required to discharge duties of a higher post, and has been paid accordingly, even though he should have rightfully been required to work against an inferior post.
(v) In any other case, where the Court arrives at the conclusion, that recovery if made from the employee, would be iniquitous or harsh or arbitrary to such an extent, as would far outweigh the equitable balance of the employer's right to recover."
[emphasis supplied]
11. The principle enunciated in proposition (ii) above cannot apply to a situation such as in the present case. In the present case, the officer to whom the payment was made in the first instance was clearly placed on notice that any payment found to have been made in excess would be required to be refunded. The officer furnished an undertaking while opting for the revised pay scale. He is bound by the undertaking.
12. For these reasons, the judgment of the High Court which set aside 28/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt the action for recovery is unsustainable. However, we are of the view that the recovery should be made in reasonable instalments. We direct that the recovery be made in equated monthly instalments spread over a period of two years.
13. The judgment of the High Court is accordingly set aside. The Civil Appeal shall stand allowed in the above terms. There shall be no order as to costs."
25. In view of the fact that the petitioners are highly educated and having executed undertakings and having derived the benefit subject to the stipulation contained in Appendix - III (supra) cannot now seek to rely upon the decision in the matter of Rafiq Masih (WhiteWasher) (supra) and rather would be governed by Jagdev Singh (supra). Though few other judgments have been cited at the bar by both the sides, for the reasons mentioned herein above, reliance on the decision in the matter of Jagdev Singh (supra) seals the fate of the matters.
26. Perhaps in the light of the observation in Jagdev Singh (supra) Mr. Anturkar fairly submitted at the bar that even if some concession is to be extended to any of the petitioners or similarly situated persons, it would depend upon the peculiar facts and circumstances for which the incumbent will have to make appropriate representation which could be considered by the State on its individual merit. However, he would submit, no blanket protection could be granted. Even the undertakings mentioned herein above enables the Government to get the excess payment refunded either by adjustment against future payments or otherwise.
27. The upshot, the impugned action of issuing order dated 29/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 ::: WP.13634.18+.odt 24.08.2018 thereby revoking corrigendum dated 20.09.2010 and the subsequent steps being taken by the universities pursuant thereto of seeking the refund from the petitioners cannot be said to be illegal. Therefore in substance the petitions fail.
28. The writ petitions are dismissed. However, the State Government shall wherever the petitioners and the similarly placed persons are still in the employment shall make the recoveries from the future payments to be made to them. In respect of such of the petitioners and similarly placed persons who have superannuated they shall be at liberty to make appropriate representation to the State Government to be routed through the respective universities/colleges which shall be considered by the State Government on case to case basis and on individual merit. It is made clear that we are not laying down any parameters for extending such concession.
29. The rule is discharged in above terms.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
JUDGE JUDGE
30. At this juncture the learned advocates for the petitioners submit that the interim relief has been in operation till date and the petitioners be extended some breathing time so that they can approach the Supreme Court.
30/31 ::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::
WP.13634.18+.odt
31. Operation of this order shall stand stayed for a period of three weeks.
[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ]
JUDGE JUDGE
habeeb
31/31
::: Uploaded on - 19/10/2023 ::: Downloaded on - 20/10/2023 05:19:11 :::