Citation : 2017 Latest Caselaw 1720 Bom
Judgement Date : 13 April, 2017
wp5251.16.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5251/2016
PETITIONER: Dr. Manoj s/o Bramhanand Sonkusre
Aged 42 years, Occ. Associate Professor
R/o 18, Kaveri Building, F1, Sitaram City,
Bhandara.
...VERSUS...
RESPONDENTS: 1. State of Maharashtra through its Secretary,
Department of Higher and Technical Education,
Mantralaya, Mumbai - 400032.
2. The Director of Higher Education, State of
Maharashtra, Central Building, Pune -1.
3. The Joint Director of Higher Education,
State of Maharashtra, Nagpur Division,
Nagpur.
4. M.B. Patel College,
Through its Principal, Sakoli,
Distsrict : Bhandara.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri Rohan Chandurkar, Advocate for petitioner
Mrs. A.R. Taiwade, AGP for respondent nos.1 to 3
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK, AND
MRS. SWAPNA JOSHI, JJ.
DATE : 13.04.2017
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK, J.)
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. The petition is heard
finally with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties.
wp5251.16.odt
By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the
respondent nos.1 to 3 to step up the basic pay band of the petitioner to
Rs.53,550/- as on 18.3.2016 and to revise the pay accordingly within a
time frame.
Shri Chandurkar, the learned Counsel for the petitioner
states that the case of the petitioner stands fully covered by the judgment
of the Aurangabad Bench of this Court dated 21.11.2013 in Writ Petition
Nos.10283/2012 and 888/2013. It is stated that the State had challenged
the said judgment before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, but the Special
Leave Petition was dismissed.
Mrs. Taiwade, the learned Assistant Government Pleader
appearing for the respondent nos.1 to 3 does not dispute the factual
statements made on behalf of the petitioner. It is stated after perusal of
the writ petition and the aforesaid judgment that the case of the petitioner
appears to have been covered by the judgment.
In view of the aforesaid, we partly allow the writ petition.
The respondent nos.1 to 3 are directed to take necessary steps to step up
the pay of the petitioner so as to bring him at par with his juniors so that
he should not be discriminated only because the junior teachers had
acquired Ph.D. Degree while the recommendations of the 6 th Pay
Commission were in force. In terms of the judgment dated 21.11.2013 in
wp5251.16.odt
Writ Petition Nos.10283/2012 and 888/2013, we direct the respondent
nos.1 to 3 to refix the pay of the petitioner and pay the arrears to the
petitioner within a period of four months.
Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order
as to costs.
JUDGE JUDGE
Wadkar
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!