wp.3200.00
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT NAGPUR, NAGPUR.
...
WRIT PETITION NO.3200/2000
1) Union of India Ministry of Communication, Department of Telecommunication Sanchar Bhawan, New Delhi.
2) The Chief General Manager Telecommunication Maharashtra Circle C.T.O. Complex, Mumbai.
3) Telecom District Manager
Buldana, at Khamgaon
Dist.Buldhana. ..PETITIONERS
v e r s u s
Ramesh s/o Laxmanrao Kherde
Aged about 56 years, occu:Retired Govt.Servant R/o at present Amravati. ...RESPONDENT ...........................................................................................................................
Dr. R.S. Sundaram, Advocate for the petitioner Respondent served.
............................................................................................................................
CORAM: R.K.DESHPANDE &
MRS . SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ
.
DATED : 8 June, 2017
th
ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER R.K.DESHPANDE, J.) For the purposes of fixation of pay, service rendered by the ::: Uploaded on - 13/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2017 00:25:02 ::: wp.3200.00 2 respondent from 07.05.1962 to 13.06.1964 falling under the combatant category was taken into consideration, excluding the period spent for training from 15.06.1962 to 29.02.1963. This makes a difference of Rs. 04/- only. No doubt, consequential increase in the other dues would be more.
2. The petition was filed in the year 2000 when the respondent was aged about 56-years. It is coming up for hearing in 2017. Dr. Sundaram, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has raised several grounds of challenge to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. However, we do not find any reason to consider all such grounds as we feel that it is not a fit case where we should exercise our discretion to decide the controversy, on merits. All the questions of law arising in the present petition are kept open to be agitated in appropriate case. The Writ Petition is dismissed.
3. Dr.Sundaram, learned counsel for the petitioners informs that this Court had passed an order on 17th June, 2002 staying the operation of the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal which came to be confirmed on 9th June, 2003. None appears for the respondent.
4. In view of dismissal of this writ petition, obviously the petitioners will have to make calculations and disburse the payment to the ::: Uploaded on - 13/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2017 00:25:02 ::: wp.3200.00 3 respondent accordingly, within a period of six moths from the date of receipt of this order. No costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
sahare
::: Uploaded on - 13/06/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 14/06/2017 00:25:02 :::