Bombay High Court
Smt Maryambee Sk. Niza M vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 3 April, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
1 83-wp-11725-16.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.11725 OF 2016
Smt. Maryambee Sk. Nizam,
Age : 66 years, Occ. Retired,
r/o. Bagwan Galli, Parbhani ..Petitioner
Vs.
1. The State of Maharashtra,
2. The Vasantrao Naik Marathwada
Agril. University, Parbhani,
through Registrar ..Respondents
--
Mr.D.R.Irale-Patil, Advocate for petitioner
Ms.R.P.Gour, AGP for respondent no.1
Mr.S.P.Kausalye, Advocate for respondent no.2
--
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND
SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.
DATE : APRIL 03, 2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per S.V.Gangapurwala, J.) :
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
With consent of parties, taken up for final
disposal.
2. The petitioner seeks following directions:
"B) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to issue a writ of mandamus or a writ in
2 83-wp-11725-16.odt
like nature, and direct the respondent
no.2, to take into account the previous
service of petitioner between 01.07.1979
to 15.07.2005 (more than 14 years and 2
months) till permanent regular
establishment order dated 15.07.2005 and
one-half of it shall be allowed to count
for pension as contemplated under Rule 57
Note(1) of M.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1982
B-1) The Hon'ble Court may be pleased
to grant interest on delayed payment as
provided under Rule 129(A) and 129(B) of
M.C.S. (Pension) Rules, 1982"
3. Mr.Irale Patil, learned Counsel for
petitioner submits that the petitioner was working
with Respondent No.3 from the year 1971. The
petitioner is absorbed as regular employee on
15.07.2005. The learned Counsel submits that the
petitioner's service from 1971 is to be considered
for the purpose of pension. The learned Counsel
relies on Rule 57 of the Maharashtra Civil Services
(Pension) Rules, 1982. The learned Counsel submits
3 83-wp-11725-16.odt
that the claim for pension, gratuity and earned
leave is not considered by the respondents.
4. Rule 57 of the Maharashtra Civil Services
(Pension) Rules, 1982 reads as under :-
"57. Non Pensionable Service : As
exceptions to Rule 30, the following are
not in pensionable service:
(a) Government servants who are paid for
work done for Government but whose whole
time is not retained for the public
service,
(b) Government servants who are not in
receipt of pay but are remunerated by
honoraria,
(c) Government servants who are paid from
contingencies,
(d) Government servants holding posts
which have been declared by the authority
which created them to be non-pensionable.
(e) Holder of all tenure posts in the
Medical Department, whether private
4 83-wp-11725-16.odt
practice is allowed to them or not, when
they do not have an active or suspended
lien on any other permanent posts under
Government."
5. From the documents placed on record, it
appears that the petitioner was appointed in the
year 1971 on daily wages and was working as
'Mazoor'. It appears that under order dated
15.07.2005, the petitioner was brought on regular
pay scale i.e. absorbed as regular employee on
15.07.2005. The petitioner retired on attaining the
age of superannuation on 31.03.2015.
6. It would be clear that in case of employee
who is paid from contingencies and who is
subsequently brought on regular establishment, half
of previous service rendered is required to be
counted for the purpose of pensionary benefits. The
petitioner was absorbed on regular establishment in
the year 2005. It appears that prior to absorption,
the petitioner was paid wages from contingencies.
5 83-wp-11725-16.odt
7. In that view, the petition deserves to be
allowed. The respondents are directed to forward
the proposal of petitioner for grant of pension and
pensionary benefits by calculating half of the
earlier service from 1971 till the date of
absorption on regular establishment i.e. 15.07.2005
and further service as regular from 15.07.2005 till
retirement. Same shall be done expeditiously.
8. Rule made absolute in those terms.
[SANGITRAO S. PATIL, J.] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
kbp
