Savita Vitthal Biramwar vs The State Of Maharashtra And ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 17759 Bom

                                    (1)                           943-wp-14411-2021




          IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                      BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     WRIT PETITION NO.14411 OF 2021

 SAVITA VITTHAL BIRAMWAR                                    ..PETITIONER

                  VERSUS

 THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ..RESPONDENTS
                        ...
 Mr. G. K. Chinchole h/f Mr. S. M. Vibhute, Advocate
 for the Petitioner.
 Mr. S. P. Tiwari, AGP for Respondents-State.
 Mr. S. S. tope, Advocate for Respondent Nos.3 and
 4.
                                          ...

                                 CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                         S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATED : 21st DECEMBER, 2021.

PER COURT:-

1. The learned counsel for petitioner submits that, he has served Mr. Tope, learned counsel for respondent nos.3 and 4.

2. The petitioner is appointed as Gramsevak. She has completed more than three years of service. The petitioner is still paid only honorarium and not being paid with the pay scale on the ground that validity certificate is not submitted. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is appointed in the year 2014.

3. The learned advocate for the petitioner submits that vigilance is not yet conducted.

(2) 943-wp-14411-2021

4. Unless the vigilance is conducted in the validation proceeding, the petitioner has no role to play. It is not in the hands of the petitioner to get the validation proceeding decided within stipulated period.

5. In the light of above, we direct that the petitioner shall appear before Scrutiny Committee on 29th December, 2021.

6. The committee shall endeavour to decide the validation proceeding, expeditiously and preferably within a period of six (06) months from the date of appearance of the petitioner. The petitioner shall cooperate in expeditious disposal of the validation proceeding. If the petitioner does not cooperate in expeditious disposal of validation proceeding, then the committee may proceed further.

7. The respondents shall take decision upon the claim of the petitioner for payment as per the pay scale and same shall not be rejected only on the ground that validation proceeding is still pending. The respondents, if are satisfied, may grant provisional approval to the petitioner as regular Gramsevak and make payment as per the applicable pay scale.

8. The respondents may take further course of

(3) 943-wp-14411-2021

action depending upon the judgment delivered by the committee in the validation proceeding. The decision shall be taken with regard to the provisional, regular appointment of the petitioner expeditiously and preferably within six (06) weeks from today.

9. In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

   (S. G. DIGE)                                (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
          JUDGE                                        JUDGE


 Devendra/December-2021