Amol Dashrath Rewatkar And Others vs All India Council For Technical ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17332 Bom

WP 30s3-20                                      1        Judgment

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

                   WRIT PETITION NO. 3023/2020

1.   Amol Dashrath Rewatkar,
     Aged-31 Years, Occu-Nil.

2.   Parag Chandrashekhar Thanare,
     Aged-32 Years, Occu-Nil.

3.   Neha Bhaskarrao Kowale,
     Aged-30 Years, Occu-Nil.

4.   Nutankumar Suryabhanji Jane,
     Aged-33 Years, Occu-Nil.

5.   Chetan Ashokrao Ugemuge,
     Aged-27 Years, Occu-Nil.

6.   Amol Vinayakrao Warke,
     Aged-31 Years, Occu-Nil.

All the Petitioners are R/o C/o Amol Dashrath
Rewatkar, 'Saichhaya', 22, Ward No.3,
New State Bank Colony, Nalwadi, Wardha.             PETITIONERS

                                .....VERSUS.....

1.   All India Council for Technical Education,
     Nelson Mandela Marg, Vasant Kunj,
     New Delhi-70.

2.   Joint Director of Technical Education,
     Nagpur Division, Nagpur.

3.   Rashtrasant Tukdoji Maharaj Nagpur
     University, Nagpur.
     Through its Registrar.

4.   Bapurao Deshmukh Foundation, Wardha,
     Through its Secretary, C/o Suresh Deshmukh
     College of Enginerring, Selukate, Wardha.

5.   Suresh Deshmukh College of Engineering,
     Selukate, Wardha. Through its Principal.       RESPONDENT S
 WP 30s3-20                                    2                       Judgment


                   Shri P.N. Shende, counsel for the petitioners.
 Shri N.R. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2.
             Shri R.D. Bhuibhar, counsel for the respondent no.3.
           Shri S.K. Bhoyar, counsel for the respondent nos.4 and 5.



CORAM : A. S.        CHANDURKAR AND G.A. SANAP, JJ.

DATE    : 13TH DECEMBER, 2021.
ORAL JUDGMENT             (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)



             RULE.     Rule made returnable forthwith.          Heard finally

considering the short issue involved.

2. The petitioners who were working as Assistant Professors at

the respondent no.5-College seek a direction for being paid their regular

salary for duties discharged by them from August-2016 to April-2018 as

per the recommendations of the Sixth Pay Commission.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that Writ

Petition No.4449 of 2019 pertaining to similarly situated Assistant

Professors from the same College was decided by this Court on

11.12.2019 and directions were issued to pay arrears of salary as per the

recommendation of the Sixth Pay Commission.

This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel for the

respondent nos.4 and 5.

WP 30s3-20 3 Judgment

4. Since we find that the petitioners are similarly situated as the

petitioners in Writ Petition No.4449 of 2019, we are inclined to issue

similar directions as issued therein for the resons recorded in the said

order.

5. Accordingly, the respondent nos.4 and 5 are directed to pay

the regular salary of the petitioners for the duties discharged by them for

the period from August-2016 to April-2018 as per the recommendations

of the Sixth Pay Commission alongwith all incidental benefits. The same

would include depositing the amount of Provident Fund in the account of

the petitioners for the aforesaid period. These directions be carried out

within a period of twelve weeks from today.

6. Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs.

             (G.A. SANAP, J.)               (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)


APTE




                                                         Signed By: Digitally signed
                                                         byROHIT DATTATRAYA
                                                         APTE
                                                         Signing Date:14.12.2021 11:11