Bombay High Court
The Vasantrao Naik Through Its ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Through Its ... on 4 May, 2026
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
2026:BHC-AUG:20640-DB
2RA-233-2023.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 233 OF 2023
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 1615 OF 2023
Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi
Vidyapeeth, Parbhani ... Applicant
vs.
Ganpat S/o. Maroti Sutare & Anr. ... Respondents
...
Mr.Manish N. Navandar for the Applicant.
Mr. A.V.Patil for Respondent No.1.
Mr.S.G.Sangale, AGP for Respondent No.2, State.
...
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE &
SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, JJ.
(THROUGH VC) DATE : MAY 04, 2026 P.C:
1. We have considered the extensive submissions made by the learned Advocate for the Applicant/Review Petitioner.
2. The issue raised in this Petition is no longer res integra. A detailed judgment was delivered by this Court on 12.10.2023 in the present Review Application. Considering the two conflicting views taken by two Division Benches in Dnyaneshwar Balasaheb Sonawane and others vs. The Trupti ...1 2RA-233-2023.odt State of Maharashtra and others, 2022 (6) Mh. L.J. 64, and in Writ Petition No. 2270 of 2021 dated 28.04.2023 (Khilari Rajendra Eknath and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and Others), this Court referred the matter to the Hon'ble the Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, under Rule 8 of Chapter I of the Bombay High Court Appellate Side Rules, 1960, keeping in view the Full Bench judgments of this Court in Vinayak Hari Kulkarni vs. State of Maharashtra, 2010 (4) Mh.L.J. (F.B.) 868, and Kahera Sayed vs. State of Maharashtra, 2018 (1) Mh.L.J. (F.B.) 884. A specific issue was framed, which reads as under:
'While considering the applicability of either the old Pension scheme or the Defined Contribution Pension Scheme, whether the word 'नियुक्ती" (appointment) as set out in the Government Resolution dated 31.10.2005 in the State language Marathi, would be decisive or whether the word "recruitment" ("भरती प्रक्रीया") appearing in the English version of the Government Resolution dated 31.10.2005, should apply to the situation, considering Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 2 of the M.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1982?
3. The Hon'ble the Chief Justice referred the issue to a larger Bench (Coram: Mangesh S. Patil, N.B.Suryawanshi and Arun R. Pednekar, JJ.).
4. Before the learned Full Bench could deal with the issue, the State of Maharashtra issued a Government Notification dated 02.02.2024, Trupti ...2 2RA-233-2023.odt providing that those appointments made after 31.05.2005, pursuant to the selection process that had commenced prior to 31.10.2005, would be granted the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme. Since this Government Resolution was placed before the learned Full Bench, the issue was concluded by a judgment dated 19.04.2024. The learned Full Bench observed that there was no substance in the submissions of Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, and further observed that it was not necessary to decide the issue referred to the Full Bench, as the Government Notification dated 02.02.2024 protects those candidates whose selection process began before 31.10.2005 and who were appointed thereafter.
5. This is the same Review Application which is pending. The employee was recommended for appointment on 10.12.2004. His appointment was to be effected after he tendered his caste validity certificate. Since he complied with the said requirement, the appointment order was issued on 02.11.2005.
6. In view of the above and the view taken by the Full Bench in its judgment dated 19.04.2024, this Review Application sans merit and is accordingly rejected.
Trupti ...3
2RA-233-2023.odt
7. Needless to state, the University would now process the pension papers of the Petitioner for granting him the benefits of the Old Pension Scheme.
(SANJAY A. DESHMUKH, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.) Trupti ...4