Friday, 01, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Shivdas Vitthalrao Gutte And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2016 Latest Caselaw 1342 Bom

Citation : 2016 Latest Caselaw 1342 Bom
Judgement Date : 7 April, 2016

Bombay High Court
Shivdas Vitthalrao Gutte And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 April, 2016
Bench: S.S. Shinde
                                    1           18-wp1085-16.odt


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY




                                                                     
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                      WRIT PETITION NO.1085 OF 2016




                                            
    1] Shivdas s/o. Vitthalrao Gutte,
       Age 48 years, Occ. Service,




                                           
    2] Sahebrao s/o. Meharbhan Rathod,
       Age 50 years, Occ. Service,

    3] Rukhminibai w/o. Nivrutti Mirase,




                                    
       Age 51 years, Occ. Service,
                              
    4] Limbabai w/o. Sitaram Karale,
       Age 52 years, Occ. Service,

    5] Dilipkumar s/o. Mohansingh Jadhav,
                             
       Age 52 years, Occ. Service,

    All r/o. Jay Durga Adiwashi Ashram
    School, Sakhartala Road, Jintoor,
      

    Tq. Jintoor, Dist. Parbahni                  ..Petitioners
   



                  versus

    1] The State of Maharashtra,
       Through its Secretary,





       Tribal Development Department, 
       Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32

    2] The Commissioner, 
       Tribal Development, Nashik.





    3] The Additional Commissioner,
       Tribal Development, Amravati

    4] The Project Officer,
       Integrated Tribal Development 
       Project, Kalamnuri, Dist.Hingoli ..Respondents




     ::: Uploaded on - 13/04/2016            ::: Downloaded on - 29/07/2016 21:23:46 :::
                                             2          18-wp1085-16.odt


    Mr.V.A.Dhakne, advocate for petitioners




                                                                            
    Mr.V.S.Badakh, AGP for respondents - State
                             --




                                                    
                                     CORAM :  S.S. SHINDE AND
                                              SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ. 

DATE : APRIL 07 , 2016

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.S. Shinde, J.) :

Heard.

2] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. By

consent of learned counsel for the parties, the

petition is taken up for final disposal.

3] This petition is filed for direction to

respondent no.4 to consider the proposals of the

petitioners for granting higher pay scale under

Assured Career Progress Scheme on account of

completion of twelve years of service by them.

4] Learned Counsel for the Petitioners invited

our attention to the unreported judgment of the

3 18-wp1085-16.odt

Division Bench of the Bombay High Court at

Principal Seat in the case of Kiran Namdeo Shinde

and ors. Vs. The State of Maharashtra and ors.,

passed in Writ Petition No.2358 of 2013 and

connected petitions delivered on 21st September,

2013, and submits that, the High Court has given a

declaration that, benefit of Assured Career

Progress Scheme (for short 'the ACPS') which is

applicable to the employees of Group 'C' and 'D'

non teaching staff of the aided private schools in

the State under the Government Resolution dated

30th April, 1998, as modified from time to time,

shall be available to the non teaching staff of

the same category in the private aided Ashram

Schools. Therefore, according to the learned

Counsel for the Petitioner, once such declaration

is there, same would apply even to the Group 'C'

and 'D' employees working under the Trible

Development Department.

                                      4           18-wp1085-16.odt




                                                                      
    5]     We   have   heard   learned   Counsel   appearing   for 

the petitioners, learned A.G.P. appearing for the

respondents. With their able assistance, perused

the impugned letter, contents of the petition,

annexures thereto and the judgment in the case of

Kiran Namdeo Shinde (supra). It is not in dispute

that even in the case of the employees working

under Group C and D from the Tribal Development

Department, the High Court has issued directions to

respondent no.1 to consider the cases of the

employees working in Group C and D non teaching

staff of the aided private schools, working under

the Tribal Development Department, for the benefit

of ACPS.

6] In that view of the matter, the respondents

are directed to examine the cases of the

petitioners for deciding whether they satisfy the

criteria laid down for claiming benefits under the

ACPS to the private aided Government schools under

5 18-wp1085-16.odt

the Government Resolution dated 30th April 1998,

as modified from time to time, and if it is found

that the petitioners are entitled to claim benefits

under the Scheme, and they satisfy the eligibility

criteria, the respondents shall extend the benefits

to the petitioners. The respondents shall

scrutinize the cases of the petitioners within a

period of six months, and extend them the benefits

as expeditiously as possible, and preferably within

a period of four months from such scrutiny.

7] Rule made absolute in above terms. The writ

petition stands disposed of in above terms.

[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.S. SHINDE, J.]

kbp

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter