Arun Parasram Wankhede vs The Commissioner Nagpur ...
2017 Latest Caselaw 8376 Bom

                                                                                  1                                                                wp4536.14

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


                                                       WRIT PETITION NO.4536/2014


Arun Parasram Wankhede, 
aged about 45 Yrs., Occu. Service, 
R/o Rampuri Ward (Camp Area), 
Behind Z.P. High School, Chamorshi
Road, Gadchiroli, Distt. Gadchiroli.                                                                                                                            ..Petitioner.

                          ..Vs..

1.          The Commissioner,
            Nagpur Division, Civil Lines, 
            Nagpur. 

2.          The Chief Executive Officer,
            Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli. 

3.          The Deputy Chief Executive Officer,
            Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli.                                                                                                            ..Respondents.
  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Shri B.M. Khan, Advocate for the petitioner. 
Shri N.H. Joshi, A.G.P. for respondent No.1. 
Ms. M.P. Munshi, Advocate for respondent Nos.2 and 3. 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 




                                                                 CORAM :  Z.A. HAQ, J.

                                                                 DATE  :     2.11.2017.



                                                        

ORAL JUDGMENT

1.                        Heard. 



2.                        Rule.   Rule made returnable forthwith.



                                            2                                                                wp4536.14

3. The petitioner / employee has challenged the order passed by the

Additional Commissioner dismissing his appeal under Rule 14 of the

Maharashtra Zilla Parishads District Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules,

1964 and rejecting his claim for time bound promotion w.e.f. 23 rd December,

1997 and consequential benefits.

4. Undisputedly, the petitioner is an employee of the Zilla Parishad

since 23rd December, 1985. As per the government resolution dated 8 th June,

1995 the employees of the Zilla Parishads working in Category III and Category

IV and who have no chance of promotion are entitled for facilities of higher

grade after completion of 12 years continuous service. According to the

petitioner as he had been working in Class III Cadre he was entitled for the

benefits under the above referred government resolution w.e.f. 23rd December,

1997 but it is given to him w.e.f. 23rd December, 2000.

5. The facts on record show that the benefits of time bound promotion are

not given to the petitioner w.e.f. 23 rd December, 1997 as according to the

respondent Nos.2 and 3, the annual confidential reports of the petitioner for

the year 1994 - 1995 were not up to the mark. It is not disputed by the

respondent Nos.2 and 3 that the remarks / adverse remarks in the annual

confidential reports of the petitioner for 1994 - 1995 were not communicated

3 wp4536.14

to the petitioner. It is well settled that if the adverse remarks are not

communicated, the same cannot be used against the employee for depriving

the employee of his legitimate claim.

6. As the remarks / adverse remarks were not communicated, they

could not have been relied to deny the benefits to the petitioner w.e.f. 23 rd

December, 1997.

7. The learned Advocate for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 submitted that

the prayers made by the petitioner need not be considered as the petition is

filed after about 10 years of arising of the cause of action and the delay and

latches are not explained. Though there are latches on the part of the

petitioner in approaching this Court, in the facts of this case, relief cannot be

denied to the petitioner as injustice is done to him by depriving him of his

legitimate claim against the established principles of law and without any

justification.

8. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause Nos.(c) and (d) of

the petition, which read as follows:

"(c) Quash and set aside the order A. No.155/2004-2005 dated 04/10/2005 passed by Hon'ble Additional Commissioner Nagpur Ann. E being illegal arbitrary and contrary to the provisions of law.

         (d)            Further direct the respondent nos.2 & 3 to modify the


                                              4                                                                wp4536.14

order dated 03/07/2004 and grant benefits of higher grade w.e.f. 23/12/1997 instead of 23/12/2000 and grant all consequential benefits including the arrears of payment."

The benefits shall be given within three months.

In the circumstances, the parties to bear their own costs

JUDGE

Tambaskar.