Bombay High Court
Sakharam Dagadu Wadmare And ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And ... on 7 December, 2017
Bench: S.V. Gangapurwala
(1) wp6572.16
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 6572 OF 2016
1. Sakharam Dagadu Wadmare, .. Petitioners
Age-62 years, Occu-Pensioner,
R/o. Sant Namdeo Nagar, Beed,
Taluka and Dist. Beed
2. Laxman Manikrao Kamble,
Age-64 years, Occu-Pensioner,
R/o. Saraswati Colony No.4,
Georai, Tq. Georai,
Dist. Beed
3. Machindra Ganpatrao Baglane,
Age-63 years, Occu-Pensioner,
R/o.Kakadhira, Tq. & Dist. Beed
Versus
1. The State of Maharashtra .. Respondents
Through its Department of General
Administration & Department of Rural
Development & Sanitation
2. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad, Beed
Mr.S.S.Jadhavar, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.C.S.Kulkarni, AGP for the respondent/State
Mr.S.N.Rodge, Advocate for respondent No.2
CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
DATED : 07.12.2017
(2) wp6572.16
ORAL JUDGMENT [PER:S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the
consent of the parties taken up for final disposal.
2. The petitioners assail the order dated
23/24.02.2016 thereby denying the benefit of time bound
promotional pay scale on the ground that only those
persons who have been absorbed as Assistant Civil
Engineer would be entitled for benefit of the pay scale
of Junior Engineer.
3. We have heard Mr. Jadhavawar, learned Advocate
for the petitioner and learned counsel for the
respondent.
4. The petitioners were initially appointed as
Mistri Grade-I/Mistri Grade-II in the year 1981, 1982 and
1984. In the year 1999 respondent No.1 created one cadre
of Assistant Civil Engineer, Mistri, Road Karkun, Muster
Clerk and two others. After having crossed 45 years of
age they were not required any further qualification. The
impugned order is illegal.
5. Mr. Rodge, learned Advocate for the Zilla
Parishad relied upon the circular dated 20.07.2001 and
(3) wp6572.16
submits that the petitioners are required to enter the
cadre of the Civil Engineering Assistant then they have
to complete 12 years of service as Civil Engineering
Assistant thereafter only the case can be considered.
6. We have also heard learned AGP.
7. Certainly the benefit to the petitioners could
not have been given before completion of 45 years of age
and on completion of 12 years of service.
8. The petitioners have given the details of date
of appointment, the date of completion of 45 years of age
and the date of completion of 12 years of service.
Sr. Name Date of Completion Date of
No. appointment of 45 years completion
of age or of 12 years
qualifying services
date
1. Sakhararm Dagadu 01.04.1984 15.11.1999 01.04.1996
Wadmare
2. Laxman Manikrao 01.04.1981 08.09.1997 01.04.1993
Kamble
3. Machindra 01.04.1982 01.01.1999 01.04.1996
Ganpatrao Baglane
9. The benefit to the petitioners can be
(4) wp6572.16
given after completing 12 years of service and if they
have not passed the departmental examination then after
completing 45 years.
10. The Division Bench of this Court in case of Writ
Petition No.5182 of 2012 under order dated 30.01.2014 has
categorically observed that the petitioner was entitled
to pay-scale of Junior Engineer on completion of 12 years
of Mistri (Grade-I). Same is the view taken in Writ
Petition No.1495 of 2014.
11. Considering the above the impugned order is
quashed and set aside. It is held that the petitioners
are entitled for the benefit of time bound promotional
pay scale on completion of 12 years of service and
completing 45 years of age and shall accord all further
consequential benefits arising expeditiously.
12. Rule made absolute in above terms. No costs.
[S.M. GAVHANE, J.] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J.]
VishalK/wp6572.16
