Bombay High Court
Raosaheb Rambhau Bhalsing vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 April, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
11183.2015+.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.11183 OF 2015
Arun s/o Baburao More
Age 56 years, Occ : Service as Clerk
R/o Khanapur, tq. Shevgaon
District Ahmednagar PETITIONER
VERSUS
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Revenue & Forest Department,
Mantralaya Mumbai-32.
2] The Deputy Director of Land Record,
Nashik Division, Nashik.
3] The Superintending Engineer
Ahmednagar Irrigation Circle
Ahmednagar.
4] The Executive Engineer
Minor Irrigation Circle,
Ahmednagar RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.11185 OF 2015
Raosaheb s/o. Rambhau Bhalsing,
Age 65 years, Occ : Retired as
Surveyor from the Department of
Land Record, Karjat,
Taluka Karjat, District
Ahmednagar,
R/o At Post Walki,
Tq. & District Ahmednagar. PETITIONER
VERSUS
::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:23:44 :::
11183.2015+.odt
2
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Revenue & Forest Department,
Mantralaya Mumbai-32.
2] The Deputy Director of Land Record,
Nashik Division, Nashik.
3] The Superintending Engineer
Ahmednagar Irrigation Circle
Ahmednagar.
4] The Executive Engineer
Minor Irrigation Circle,
Ahmednagar RESPONDENTS
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO.11188 OF 2015
Abasaheb s/o Tukaram Satpute
Age 61 years, Occ : Retired as
Jr. Clerk from the office of
Superintendent of Land Record
Parner, tq. Parner District
Ahmednagar,
R/o. At Post Khatgaon Takali
Tq. & District Ahmednagar PETITIONER
VERSUS
1] The State of Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Revenue & Forest Department,
Mantralaya Mumbai-32.
2] The Deputy Director of Land Record,
Nashik Division, Nashik.
3] The Superintending Engineer
Ahmednagar Irrigation Circle
Ahmednagar.
::: Uploaded on - 11/04/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:23:44 :::
11183.2015+.odt
3
4] The Executive Engineer
Minor Irrigation Circle,
Ahmednagar RESPONDENTS
...
Mr. Amol N. Kakade, Advocate for the
Petitioners in all Writ Petitions
Mr. S.B.Yawalkar, AGP for the Respondent No.
3 / State in all Writ Petitions
Mr. Shyam C. Arora, Advocate for the
respondent No.3.
Respondent Nos.2 and 4 served.
...
CORAM: S.S.SHINDE &
SANGITRAO S.PATIL,JJ.
Reserved on : 04.04.2016
Pronounced on : 07.04.2016
JUDGMENT: [Per S.S.Shinde, J.]:
1] Heard.
2] Rule. Rule made returnable
forthwith, and heard with the consent of the
parties.
3] The petitioners were employed as
Muster Assistants in Irrigation Department of
the State of Maharashtra. The petitioners
filed separate complaints before the
Industrial Court, Ahmednagar, alleging the
11183.2015+.odt
commission of unfair labour practices covered
by the Items 5, 6, 9 and 10 of Schedule IV of
the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions
and Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices
Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the
'Said Act of 1971']. The Industrial Court
allowed the complaints filed by the
petitioners and by the Judgment and Order
dated 29.12.1994 directed the respondents to
confer status and privileges of permanency
and other consequential benefits from the
date of complaint.
4] The learned counsel appearing for
the petitioners submit that, one of the
Mustering Assistants filed Writ Petition
No.2946/1997 (Shri Ramchandra Kondiba Mahajan
Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others) before
the Bombay High Court at it's Principal Seat
at Bombay. The Division Bench gave
directions in the said Writ Petition to
consider the past services for grant of
11183.2015+.odt
pension in view of the Judgment and Order
passed by the Industrial Court. The same
relief is being claimed by these petitioners
in the present Writ Petitions. The learned
counsel submit that, the Special Leave
Petition filed, challenging the aforesaid
Judgment passed in Writ Petition No.2946/1997
(Shri Ramchandra Kondiba Mahajan Vs. The
State of Maharashtra & others) is also
dismissed.
5] The learned Additional Government
Pleader states that, the past service cannot
be considered of the petitioners in view of
the scheme framed by the Government and
approved by the Apex Court vide Government
Resolution dated 01.12.1995 and the
subsequent Government Resolution of the year
1999. The learned Addl. G. P. further
submits that, it is only after the mustering
assistants are absorbed in Government
service, they can be considered as Government
11183.2015+.odt
employees and benefits of Government service
can be accorded to them. As these
petitioners after absorption did not complete
the period of qualifying service, they are
not entitled for pensionary benefits.
6] It is not disputed that in these
matters, the petitioners had approached the
Industrial Court by filing complaint ULP.
The said complaints are allowed and
Industrial Court directed the present
respondent/State to accord those complainants
/ petitioners herein status and privileges of
permanency and consequential benefits from
the date of filing of complaints. As the
pensionary benefits are not being accorded,
one of such complainants filed writ petitions
bearing Writ Petition No. 2946 of 1997, Writ
Petition No. 2236 of 1997 and Writ Petition
No. 2246 of 1997. The Division Bench of this
Court partly allowed the said petitions and
passed the following order.
11183.2015+.odt
1. In view of the Judgment and
Order dated 08th April, 1997 passed
by the learned Industrial Court,
Solapur, for the purpose of
considering the grant of pensionary
benefits, the Petitioners shall be
treated as Permanent Employees with
effect from 01st October, 1988 till
the respective dates of
superannuation.
2. In case of the Petitioners
who were already superannuated, it
will be open for them to make a
representation to the concerned
Authorities for grant of pensionary
benefits.
3. If such representation is
made, same shall be decided as
expeditiously as possible and
preferably within a period of four
months from the date on which the
representations are made.
4. We make it clear that, apart
from issuing directions regarding the
date of permanent employment of the
respective Petitioners, we have not
examined the case of the Petitioners
as regards the eligibility of
pensionary benefits.
5. Rule is made partly absolute
on both terms with no order as to
costs.
7] The Special Leave Petition filed
against the said judgment and order is also
11183.2015+.odt
dismissed. In the light of that, we adopt
the same course as adopted by this Court in
the above said writ petitions and pass the
following order.
1. In view of the Judgment and Order
dated 29.12.1994 passed by the
learned Industrial Court, Ahmednagar,
for the purpose of considering the
grant of pensionary benefits, the
Petitioners shall be treated as
Permanent Employees with effect from
the date of their complaints i. e.
from the date of filing of their
respective ULP's till the respective
dates of superannuation.
2. In case of the Petitioners who
were already superannuated, it will
be open for them to make a
representation to the concerned
Authorities for grant of pensionary
benefits.
3. If such representation is made,
same shall be decided as
expeditiously as possible and
preferably within a period of four
months from the date on which the
representations are made.
4. We make it clear that, apart from
issuing directions regarding the date
of permanent employment of the
respective Petitioners, we have not
examined the case of the Petitioners
as regards the eligibility of
pensionary benefits.
11183.2015+.odt
5. Rule is made partly absolute on
above terms with no order as to
costs.
Sd/- Sd/-
[SANGITRAO S.PATIL] [S.S.SHINDE]
JUDGE JUDGE
DDC
