The State Of Maharashtra Thro ... vs Pradip Shridharrao Dahale
2021 Latest Caselaw 14596 Bom

                                             1                          948 wp 14436-19.odt

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                    BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                     948 WRIT PETITION NO.14436 OF 2019

     THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO PRINCIPAL SECRETARY
     WATER RESOURCES IRRIGATION DEPT MUMBA AND OTHERS
                              VERSUS
                 PRADIP SHRIDHARRAO DAHALE
                                 ...
                AGP for Petitioners : Mr. A. R. Kale
       Advocate for Respondent : Mrs. Suchita A. Dhongade
                                 ...

                                    CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA &
                                                   R. N. LADDHA, JJ.
                                    DATED : 6th OCTOBER, 2021.
                                         ...
PER COURT :



1.       Mr. Kale, learned AGP submits that the respondent fled

original application challenging the re-pay fiation and the

recovery          claimed           before       the   Maharashtra        Administrative

Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the original application, set aside

re-pay fiation without discussing about the legality of the re-

pay fiation. It only relied upon the judgment of Apei Court in

State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafi Masih (White

Washer) etc., reported in AIR 2015 SC 696 setting aside the

recovery. However, at the same time in operative part set aside

the order re-fiing the pay.




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/10/2021                           ::: Downloaded on - 08/10/2021 04:28:49 :::
                                     2                     948 wp 14436-19.odt

2.       Mrs. Dhongade, learned advocate for the respondent

submits that the respondent was legitimately entitled to the pay

scale as was accorded to him since year, 1989. The respondent

was not given three benefts. According to the learned counsel

the issue is no longer res integra and decided by this court.

There is no necessity to remit the matter back to the Tribunal.



3.       We have considered the submissions.              We have gone

through the judgment delivered by the Tribunal. Upon the

perusal of the judgment, it transpires that the learned judge has

discussed only about the authority of the Government to claim

recovery, it nowhere discussed about the legality of the pay

fiation and how refiation of pay was erroneous. However, in

the operative order, the Tribunal set aside the re-fiing of the

pay and the consequential order of the recovery.                    It further

directed to fi the pension as per last pay drawn.



4.       We cannot sustain the order passed setting aside re-fiing

the pay without discussion upon the case putforth by the

present petitioner before the Tribunal.



5.       In the result, we pass the following order.




     ::: Uploaded on - 07/10/2021             ::: Downloaded on - 08/10/2021 04:28:49 :::
                                   3                      948 wp 14436-19.odt

                                  ORDER

I) The impugned order passed by the Tribunal is

quashed and set aside.

II) The parties are relegated before the Tribunal. The

parties shall appear before the Tribunal on 27 th October,

2021 and putforth their stand. The Tribunal shall

thereafter decide the application No.937 of 2018 afresh

after hearing the parties eipeditiously.

III) Till the original application is decided by the

Tribunal, the recovery from the present respondent shall

not be claimed nor the pension as being paid be

stopped. Further steps be taken pursuant to the

decision of the Tribunal in the Original Application No.

937 of 2018.

IV) With the aforesaid observations, writ petition is

disposed of. No costs.

(R. N. LADDHA, J.) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.)

vsm/-