Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Bombay High Court

Shankar Bhagwanrao Deshmukh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 18 June, 2019

Author: Mangesh S. Patil

Bench: S.V.Gangapurwala, Mangesh S. Patil

                                                          907,145,146
                                      1

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD


                         WRIT PETITION NO.3293 OF 2019

                  SHANKAR BHAGWANRAO DESHMUKH
                                   VERSUS
               THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                      ...
              Advocate for Petitioner : Deshpande Priyanka R.
                    AGP for Respondents: S.G.Karlekar
                     Adv.Mrs.G.L.Deshpande for R.7.
                                     ...
                                    WITH
                      WRIT PETITION NO.3304/2019

                   BOBADE RAGHUNATH KISHANRAO
                                   VERSUS
                 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
                                      ...
              Advocate for Petitioner : Deshpande Priyanka R.
                    AGP for Respondents: S.G.Karlekar
                     Adv.Mrs.G.L.Deshpande for R.7.
                                      ...

                     145 WRIT PETITION NO.3291 OF 2019

                   VINAYAK DHONDIRAM GUTTE
                               VERSUS
           THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
                                  ...
  Advocate for Petitioner : R.R.Deshpande h/f Deshpande Priyanka
                                 R.
                 AGP for Respondents: P.K.Lakhotia
                 Adv. Kadam Vikram S. For R No. 7.
                                  ...
                                WITH
               146 WRIT PETITION NO.3292 OF 2019

                     VISHWAS CHOKHAJI BHALERAO
                               VERSUS
                THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS


::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2019                 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 06:45:11 :::
                                                                     907,145,146
                                              2

                                      ...
              Advocate for Petitioner : Deshpande Priyanka R.
                   AGP for Respondents: P.K.Lakhotia.
                          Adv.Dube Anjali for R.7.
                                          -----
                            CORAM : S.V.GANGAPURWALA &
                                         MANGESH S. PATIL, JJ.
                                 DATE     : 18/06/2019

 PER COURT :

All these petitions involve common question of law and based on similar set of facts to avoid numerosity, are disposed of together.

2] The petitioners herein are appointed in the year 1993-1995 as Lecturers in various colleges. They have retired on attaining the age of superannuation. The contention of the learned counsel for petitioners is that these petitioners have put in pensionable service. The pension proposal is denied to them only on the ground that the petitioners did not pass NET/SET qualification. According to the learned counsel the benefit of Government Resolution dated 27/6/2013 would be available to the petitioners and would be entitled for the benefit of pension.

3] Mr.Karlekar, Additional Government Pleader submits that the Government pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 27/6/2013 has regularised services of those persons appointed between 23/10/1992 to 3/4/2000 though had not completed NET/SET but did not allow them regular pensionary benefits. In Condition No.18 it has been mentioned that the incumbents are not eligible and entitled for pensionary benefits and they are eligible for DCPS.

::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 06:45:11 :::

907,145,146 3 4] We have heard the learned counsel for petitioners and the learned AGP.

5] The issue involved in the present matters is no longer res- integra in view of the catena of judgments delivered by this Court. Reference can be had to the judgment at the Principal Seat in Writ Petition No.13166/2017 decided vide order dated 3/10/2018. The said judgment has been followed in various matters.

6] The details of the petitioners' appointment and the date of retirement is reproduced as under :

Sr.No. Writ Petition Name of Post Date of Date of No. the Appointme retirement Petitioner nt 1 WP / Vinayak Director of 08/08/95 31/08/2018 3291/2019 Dhondiram physical Gutte education 2 WP / Shankar Assistant 06/09/93 31/03/2018 3293/2019 Bhagwanra Professor o in Deshmukh economics 3 WP / Vishwas Lecturer in 11/11/95 28/02/2015 3292/2019 Chokhaji Sociology Bhalerao 4 WP / Bobade Lecturer in 20/06/98 30/04/2018 3304/2019 Raghunath Commerce Kishanrao 7] Considering the aforesaid aspects of the matter, it is also not disputed by the respondents that the appointment of the petitioners have been made by due procedure of law and adhering to the ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 06:45:11 ::: 907,145,146 4 selection process.

8] In light of the above, the impugned communication is quashed and set aside. The respondents shall consider the case of the petitioners for sanction of pension as per rules after verifying the details of the appointment of the petitioners, the date of retirement and if they have put in pensionable service, shall accord sanction for pension to the petitioners.

9] Writ Petitions are disposed of. No costs.

(MANGESH S. PATIL,J.) (S.V.GANGAPURWALA,J.) umg/ ::: Uploaded on - 21/06/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 14/07/2019 06:45:11 :::