Madhavrao S/O Marotrao Raut vs The Zilla Parishad, Nagpur ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17196 Bom

                                                                                              WP.3699.18.J
                                                       1


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

WRIT PETITION NO. 3699/2018

* Madhavrao s/o Matotrao Raut Aged: 58 years, occu: Retired Civil Engineering Assistant R/o Plot No.165, Near Corporation Zone Office, Nehrunagar, P.O. Hanumannagar Nagpur -440 009. ..PETITIONER

versus

1) The Zilla Parishad, Nagpur Through : the Chief Executive Officer Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.

2)       The Executive Engineer,
         Works Department
         Zilla Parishad, Nagpur.

3)       Block Development Officer,
         Panchayat Samiti, Nagpur.

4)     The Secretary
       Government of Maharashtra
       Rural Development Department
       24, Marzban path, Fort, Mumbai-400 001. ..                                     RESPONDENTS

..................................................................................................................

Mr D.P. Shouche, Advocate for petitioner Mr. I.S. Charlewar, Advocate for respondents 1 and 2 Respondent nos. 3 and 4 are served ................................................................................................................

CORAM: SUNIL B. SHUKRE & ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ DATED : 9th December, 2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT: (PER SUNIL B.SHUKRE, J.) WP.3699.18.J

1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with

consent of respective parties.

3. It is not in dispute that the petitioner, a retired employee of

Zilla Parishad, Nagpur, got his pension finally fixed at Rs. 10,620/- as

per the final pension order dated 25.07.2017. It is also not in dispute

that the final pension order was revised by respondent no.1 by another

order dated 19.05.2018 and, such a revision was to the disadvantage of

the petitioner. As a result of the same, the pension of the petitioner

fixed at Rs.10,620/- has been reduced to Rs.7,970/- per month.

4. Revision of the pension finally fixed to the disadvantage of

the retired employee is permissible only in case there is a clerical error

in the final assessment of the pension done earlier. It is provided in Rule

131(1) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1982 that

subject to the provisions of Rules 26 and 27, pension once authorized

after final assessment shall not be revised to the disadvantage of the

Government servant, unless such revision becomes necessary on

account of detection of a clerical error subsequently. It is nobody's case

that the pension was revised subsequently on account of detection of

clerical error. Therefore we find that the impugned order is contrary to

what is provided under Rule 131(1) of the MCS Rules, 1982 and,

therefore, is bad in law.

WP.3699.18.J

5. In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned order

is hereby quashed and set aside. It is directed that the petitioner shall be

paid pension as per the final assessment of his pension made vide

order dated 25.07.2017. It is further directed that if any recovery has

been effected from the petitioner, the same shall be refunded to him in

two equal installments, in next two months.

6. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs.

                   JUDGE                           JUDGE
sahare




                                                            Digitally Signed ByNARENDRA
                                                            BHAGWANTRAO SAHARE
                                                            Location:
                                                            Signing Date:10.12.2021 14:41