Bombay High Court
Kalpana Khirappa Patil And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through Chief ... on 4 October, 2018
Bench: R. M. Savant, Nitin W. Sambre
wp-13379-17&ors.(902&903).doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.13379 OF 2017
Maharashtra Rajya Madhyamik Va Uccha
Madhyamik Shala Kruti Samittee
Through its
District Executive President
Shri Dattatray Narayan Patil : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary
General Administration Department & ors. : Respondents.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.2095 OF 2018
Maharashtra Rajya Madhyamik Va Uccha
Madhyamik Shala Kruti Samittee
Through its
District Executive President
Shri Dattatray Narayan Patil : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary
General Administration Department & ors. : Respondents.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.4296 OF 2014
Maharashtra Rajya Madhyamik Va Uccha
Madhyamik Shala Kruti Samittee
Through its
District Executive President
Shri Dattatray Narayan Patil : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary
General Administration Department & ors. : Respondents.
WITH
WRIT PETITION STAMP NO.21465 OF 2018
mmj 1 of 5
wp-13379-17&ors.(902&903).doc
Maharashtra Rajya Madhyamik Va Uccha
Madhyamik Shala Kruti Samittee
Through its
District Executive President
Shri Dattatray Narayan Patil : Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary
General Administration Department & ors. : Respondents.
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.11097 OF 2018
Shikshan Sangharsha Sanghatana
thru President Smt Madhuri Mengate & Anr : Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra
Through its Chief Secretary
Ministry of Finance & ors. : Respondents.
Mr. S S Pakale i/by Mr.Shankar Maruti Katkar for the Petitioners
Mrs. M P Thakur AGP for the State in all Writ Petitions
CORAM :R. M. SAVANT, &
NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ
DATE : 4th OCTOBER, 2018 P.C. 1 The above group of Petitions challenge the Government Resolution by which the Defined Contributory Pension Scheme, is sought to be made applicable to the Petitioners. The Petitioners in the above Petitions claim that they have all been appointed prior to the cut off date i.e. 1-11-2005 and therefore they would be covered by the old pension scheme. Certain ad- interim orders have been passed by the Division Benches of this Court mmj 2 of 5 wp-13379-17&ors.(902&903).doc directing that the persons similarly situated like the Petitioners the old pension scheme would be applicable. The above Petitions had come up for admission on 28-9-2018 before a Division Bench of R. M. Savant and M. S. Karnik JJ. Being shown the orders passed by the Division Benches of this court granting ad-interim reliefs and considering the issue raised, the said Bench of which one of us was a member, was of the view that the above Petitions required to be admitted and interim reliefs to the same extent as granted by the other Division Benches, namely that the old pension scheme would continue to apply to the employees who were appointed prior to the cut off date i.e. 1-11- 2005 were required to be granted. However, since the entire group of the above Petitions was listed, the said Bench had not examined the cause title of each of the Petitions and the list annexed to the Petitions at Exhibit A or Exhibit B as the case may be, which list comprised the names of the persons on behalf of whom the Petitions were filed and reliefs were sought. Hence the said Bench had passed orders in the above group of Petitions, but had not signed the said orders as it was later on found that the Petitions were filed without paying the necessary court fees on behalf of a large number of Petitioners and that some of the Petitioners were within the territorial jurisdiction of the Aurangabad and Nagpur Bench of this Court and had therefore directed the office to put up all the Writ Petitions for directions so as to ascertain as to on whose behalf the above Petitions have been filed and whether court fees have been paid.
mmj 3 of 5
wp-13379-17&ors.(902&903).doc
2 In the interregnum i.e. since yesterday the constitution of the
Bench has changed and the Bench comprising of R. M. Savant and Nitin W Sambre JJ has been constituted. The Petitioners are accordingly listed before us for directions, on close scrutiny of the above Petitions we find that except in Writ Petition No.4296 of 2014 wherein all the Petitioners are within the jurisdiction of this Court, in the other Petitions we find from the list annexed at Exhibit A or Exhibit B as the case may be, the said Petitions are also filed on behalf of the persons who are within the jurisdiction of the Aurangabad Bench and Nagpur Bench of this Court. We also find that in the above Petitions the Court Fees in respect of all the Petitioners have not been paid. We therefore do not deem it proper to entertain the Petitions filed on behalf of the Petitioners who are within the jurisdiction of the Aurangabad Bench and Nagpur Bench of this Court. We however, make it clear that we would entertain the above Petitions only in respect of the Petitioners who are within the jurisdiction of the Principal Seat at Mumbai.
3 The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners is accordingly granted leave to amend the above Petitions so as to delete the Petitioners as also the concerned Respondents who are within the jurisdiction of the Aurangabad Bench and Nagpur Bench of this Court. Amendment to be carried out latest by 9-10-2018. Since on 28-9-2018 the earlier Bench i.e. R. M. Savant and M. S. Karnik JJ had passed the order granting Rule and interim relief which is in the mmj 4 of 5 wp-13379-17&ors.(902&903).doc same terms as granted vide order dated 22-9-2017 passed in Writ Petition No.10671 of 2017, Rule to issue in the above Petitions and interim reliefs in terms of the ad-interim relief granted vide order dated 22-9-2017 passed in Writ Petition No.10671 of 2017 is granted in all the above Petitions. However, it is clarified that the said interim relief would operate only in so far as the Petitioners who are within the jurisdiction of this court i.e. the Principal Seat at Mumbai. The Learned Counsel for the Petitioners Mr. Pakale assures the Court that the deficit court fees in respect of the Petitioners in each of the above Petitions would be paid latest by 9-10-2018, as also the directions as regards the amendment both in the cause title as well as in the list of the Petitioners would also be carried out by the said date. Put up for compliance on 10-10-2018.
4 In so far Writ Petition No.11097 of 2018 is concerned, the Learned Counsel for the Petitioners seeks leave to amend in terms of the draft handed in so as to incorporate two additional Petitioners from Raigad and Solapur Districts, whose names are mentioned in the draft amendment. The said amendment also to be carried out latest by 9-10-2018.
5 The Petitioners whose names would be deleted would be entitled to move the Aurangabad Bench or the Nagpur Bench of this Court as the case may be.
Meera Mahesh Jadhav Digitally signed by Meera Mahesh Jadhav [NITIN W. SAMBRE, J] [R.M.SAVANT, J] Date: 2018.10.05 17:49:36 +0530 mmj 5 of 5