Dr.Chandrabhan Uddhav Dhawas vs The Chief Executive Officer,Z.P. ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 2784 Bom

                                                    1                                 Judg. wp 2108.00.odt 

                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY :
                              NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR.

                                       Writ Petition No.2108 of 2000

              Dr. Chandrabhan Uddhav Dhawas,
              aged about 43 years, Occ.-Service,
              R/o.-Ayurvedic Hospital, Ghonsa, Tahsil Wani, 
              District Yavatmal.                                                  .... Petitioner.

                                                   -Versus-

              1]       The Chief Executive Officer,
                       Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal.

              2]       The District Health Officer, 
                       Zilla Parishad, Yavatmal.

              3]       The State of Maharashtra,
                       through its Secretary,
                       Ministry of Rural Development, 
                       Mantralaya, Mumbai.                              .... Respondents.
              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Ms Arti Singh, Advocate holding for Shri P.D. Meghe, Advocate for the 
              petitioner.
              Mrs. Geeta Tiwari, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent no.3.
              -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Coram : R. K. Deshpande & 
                             Mrs. Swapna Joshi, JJ.

th Dated : 06 June, 2017

ORAL JUDGMENT (Per R. K. Deshpande, J.)

2 Judg. wp 2108.00.odt

The petitioner joined the post of Junior Medical Officer

(Class-III) in the services of Zilla Parishad on 26-12-1983 and

claims higher pay scale available to the promotional post in the

scheme of stagnated promotion launched by the Zilla Parishad

as per the Government Resolution dated 08-06-1995. From the

reply filed by respondent nos.1 and 2, it appears that the

Selection Committee examined the confidential reports of the

petitioner for the last five years i.e. 1989-1990 to 1993-1994 and

found that the confidential reports of the petitioner for the years

1990-1991 and 1993-1994 were adverse. The petitioner was

found unfit by the competent Selection Committee and therefore

was denied the benefit of higher pay scale of

Rs. 8000-275-10500/- available to the promotional post.

2] The claim of the petitioner is based on the Government

Resolution dated 08-06-1995. The copy of the same is annexed

with the petition as Annexure-'F'. The scheme was

implemented in respect of the employees working in Class-III

and Class-IV post who could not get promotion for want of

vacancies or where no promotional avenues were open. The

criterion prescribed for consideration is rendering of 12 years

continuous regular service in Class-III or Class-IV post. The

3 Judg. wp 2108.00.odt

benefit under the said Government Resolution was required to

be granted to the employees in accordance with the seniority

and passing of the departmental examination. It is not in

dispute that on 22-02-2000 the certain other employees junior

to the petitioner were granted benefit of the scheme from the

date of completion of their 12 years regular continuous service

in Class-III post.

3] Perusal of Government Resolution dated 08-06-1995

does not reveal that the fitness is the criterion to be adopted

for grant of benefit of the higher pay scale. The criterion is of

rendering of 12 years continuous regular service and passing

of the departmental examination. The petitioner satisfies such

criterion. The averment in the petition is that from the

beginning the service record of the petitioner has been excellent

and he received the certificates from time to time for that

purpose from respondent nos. 1 and 2. The copies of the

certificates issued in 1983-1984 and 1995 are also annexed with

the petition. Though in the reply filed by respondent-Zilla

Parishad it is stated that the confidential reports and the

minutes of the Selection Committee shall be produced at the

time of final hearing of the petition, no one represents the Zilla

4 Judg. wp 2108.00.odt

Parishad and we are at loss to look into the said aspect of the

matter. The petition was filed in the year 2000 when the

petitioner was aged about 43 years and working in Class-III

post.

4] In view of above, we feel that the case of the petitioner is

required to be reconsidered by the respondent nos. 1 and 2 for

grant of higher pay scale with effect from 22-02-2000 i.e. the

date on which the persons junior to the petitioner in Class-III

post were granted the benefit under the scheme. We are at loss

to know the basis for adopting the criterion of fitness for grant

of higher pay scale. It would, therefore, not be possible to us to

direct the respondents to grant benefits to the petitioner under

the scheme of stagnated promotion and the matter will have to

be left to the decision of the respondent-Zilla Parishad to

consider the case of the petitioner in the light of what we have

observed in this judgment.

5] In the result, the Writ Petition is partly allowed. The

respondents are directed to reconsider the case of the petitioner

for grant of benefit of the higher pay scale under the scheme of

stagnated promotion in accordance with law. The decision shall

5 Judg. wp 2108.00.odt

be taken within a period of three months from the date of

communication of this decision to the respondents. All other

questions are left open to be agitated again if such occasion

arises. No order as to costs.

                              JUDGE                                          JUDGE




              Deshmukh