Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.42 seconds)
Documents citing Umabai Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 4 July, 2019

Sangpal Sopanrao Bhosale vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 28 February, 2020

We fnd that the submission made by the learned advocate for the petitioner, that the judgment given in the case of Smt. Umabai w/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others, and other connected matters, clinches the issue, has substance and is required to be accepted. 5 Though the learned advocate for the Respondents No.3 and 4 opposed the petition, he has not been able to point out that the issue is not covered by the above referred judgment. 6 Hence, the following order:
Bombay High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Z A Haq - Full Document

Nagorao Rangrao Kalyankar vs The State Of Maharashtra And Others on 13 November, 2019

5. Though Mr. Pulkundwar, learned counsel for respondents no. 3 and 4 resists, the situation appears to be squarely covered by decision of division bench of this court in the case of Smt. Umabai W/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh Vs. State of Maharashtra, Through its Principal Secretary reported in 2019 (5) ALL MR 193 has observed, thus, " 9. The Maharashtra Zilla Parishad District Services Rules provide that, provisions of the Pension Rule shall apply.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S P Deshmukh - Full Document

Lata Wd/O. Gunwant Warthi vs State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, ... on 5 May, 2025

-- 10 -- WP No.4849.2024 (J).doc pensionary benefits on the grounds that they did not possess the qualification of "Trained Teacher". This Court after considering the same held that petitioners therein though did not possess requisite qualification of "Trained Teacher", but they were treated as regular employees working and on officiating, substantive vacant post till the age of their retirement and therefore, would be entitled for pension and pensionary benefits and had directed the respondents to consider case of the petitioners for grant of pensionary benefits. (20) Similarly, in the case of Anjali Kando (supra), the husband of the petitioner therein had completed 28 years of service, therefore, this Court had held that husband of the petitioner had completed the qualifying service of 20 years and thus, the case was covered by the judgment in Umabai Deshmukh(supra) and therefore, directed the respondent No.2, Chief Executive Officer to forthwith release the family pension and other pensionary benefits in favour of the petitioner therein.
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - A G Gharote - Full Document

Tulshiram Kamu Dahikar vs Divisional Commissioner, Amravati ... on 14 September, 2020

4. On merits, the petitioner is relying upon judgment and order dated 04/07/2019 passed by Aurangabad Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No.6143/2016 [Smt. Umabai w/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs. The State of Maharashtra and others] and connected writ petitions, wherein benefit of pension was granted to employees, who according to the petitioner were similarly situated.
Bombay High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - M Pitale - Full Document

Shankar Lukhaji Sonawane vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr The ... on 27 February, 2023

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad dated 4th July, 2019 in Writ Petition No. 6143 of 2016 (Smt. Umabai W/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) and another judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24th August, 2020 in Writ Petition No. 3912 of 2019 (Sonu P. Kapadne & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra).
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S V Marne - Full Document

Rohidas Yamaji Sonwane vs The State Of Maha. Thr. Sec. And Ors on 27 February, 2023

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners relies on the judgment of the Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad dated 4th July, 2019 in Writ Petition No. 6143 of 2016 (Smt. Umabai W/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) and another judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24th August, 2020 in Writ Petition No. 3912 of 2019 (Sonu P. Kapadne & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra).
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S V Marne - Full Document

Ashok Gulabrao Chavan Decd Thr Wife ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr The ... on 27 February, 2023

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the 1 16-WP-14434-2022-production judgment of the Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad dated 4th July, 2019 in Writ Petition No. 6143 of 2016 (Smt. Umabai W/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) and another judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24th August, 2020 in Writ Petition No. 3912 of 2019 (Sonu P. Kapadne & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra).
Bombay High Court Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - S V Marne - Full Document
1   2 Next