Bombay High Court
Satish Bhagwanrao Jadhav And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 29 August, 2016
Bench: R.M. Borde
{1}
wp 1302.16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.1302 OF 2016
1. Satish Bhagwanrao Jadhav
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o House No.33, Yashwant Nagar,
Ambad Road
2. Babasaheb Ramchandra Gaikwad,
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o Yashwant Nagar,
Ambad Road, Jalna
3. Balaji Shankarrao Pimple,
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o Yashwant Nagar,
Ambad Road, Jalna.
4. Dadasaheb Uttamrao Mote,
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o Yashwant Nagar,
Ambad Road, Jalna
5. Vishwas Raghunathrao Kadam,
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o Shardanagar, Ambad,
Dist. Jalna.
6. Sulbha Ambadasrao Murlidhar,
Age: 57 years, occu: service,
R/o Sharadnagar, Ambad,
Dist. Jalna.
7. Narayan Haribhau Borade,
Age: 61 years, occu: service,
R/o Yashwant Nagar,
Ambad road, Jalna. Petitioners
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra
through Its Principal Secretary
Higher & Technical Education Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai 32
::: Uploaded on - 30/08/2016 ::: Downloaded on - 01/09/2016 00:38:39 :::
{2}
wp 1302.16.odt
2. The Director of Higher Education, M.S.
Central Building, Pune - 01
3. The Joint Director of Higher Education,
Aurangabad Region, Aurangabad
4. Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathawada University,
Aurangabad through Its Registrar.
5. Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha, Jalna
Near Motibagh, Jalna
through Its Secretary
6. Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha's
Arts, Commerce & Science College, Jalna
Through Its Principal
7. Matsyodari Shikshan Sanstha's
Arts, Commerce & Science College, Ambad
Through Its Principal Respondents
Mr. Abhishek C. Deshpande advocate for the petitioners
Mr. V.M. Kagne, Assistant Govt. Pleader for Respondent No.1 to 3
Mr. S.G. Chapalgaonkar advocate for respondent No.4
Mr. S.S. Tope advocate for respondent Nos.5, 6 and 7.
_______________
CORAM : R.M. BORDE &
K.K. SONAWANE, JJ
(Date : 29th August, 2016.)
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: R.M. Borde, J)
1 Heard.
2 Rule. With the consent of the parties, petition is taken up
{3}
wp 1302.16.odt
for final decision at admission stage.
3 The petitioners are praying for issuance of direction to the
respondents for stepping up their pay so as to bring it at par with
the pay of Junior Professors with effect from the date of revision
of pay/ salary as per the Government Resolution dated 12.8.2009.
4 The facts giving rise to the instant petition need not be
stated in detail, since those are undisputed. Even otherwise, the
facts are identical as in the case of Dr. Sudhakar Murlidhar
Lawande and others versus State of Maharashtra (Writ Petition
No.11129 of 2015) and in the case of Sudamrao Keshavrao Aher
& Ors. Versus The State of Maharashtra and others (in Writ
Petition No.10283 of 2012) decided on 21st November, 2013 (2014
(1) All MR 697).
5 For the reasons recorded while disposing of the aforesaid
matter presented by Sudamrao Aher and others, the instant Writ
Petition also deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly
allowed.
6 The respondents shall take necessary action to step-up the
pay/pension of the petitioners so as to bring it at par with the
juniors where all the parameters are same and shall not
{4}
wp 1302.16.odt
discriminate only because the junior teachers have acquired Ph.D.
Degree/M.Phil. Qualification as the case may be and are getting
higher salary/pension during implementation of 6th pay
Commission's recommendations. The salaries of the petitioners
may be refixed and arrears be paid within a period of six months.
7 Rule is made absolute accordingly.
8 There shall be no order as to costs.
(K.K. SONAWANE, J) (R.M.BORDE, J)
vbd
