Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5091 Bom
Judgement Date : 7 June, 2022
210-WP-3347.2008(J) 1/4
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3347 OF 2008
Madhukar s/o Somaji Jambhule,
Aged about 57 years, Occupation-Service,
R/o. Sheikh Hamid Sk.Yusuf,
Near Noorie Masjid, Station-5, Wardha. ... Petitioner
-versus-
1. The Managing Director,
Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company
Limited (MSEDCL),
Plot No.G-9, Prakashgarh, Bandra (East),
Mumbai.
2. The Managing Director,
Maharashtra State Electricity Transmission Company
Limited (MSETCL),
Plot No.C-19, E-Block, Prakash Ganga,
Bandra-Kurla Complex, Bandra (East),
Mumbai. ... Respondents.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Shri P.R. Parsodkar, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms Mohini Sharma, Advocate h/f Shri S.V.Purohit, Advocate for respondents.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CORAM : A.S.CHANDURKAR and URMILA S.JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.
DATE : 7th JUNE, 2022.
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)
The petitioner who claims to belong to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe was
appointed with the respondent no.1 on the post of 'Sub-Engineer' on
26.11.1971. He was subsequently promoted on 18.10.1980 as 'Junior
Engineer'. Thereafter on 21.06.1996 he was promoted to the post of 'Assistant
Engineer' and subsequently on 19.05.1999 as 'Deputy Executive Engineer'.
Since the petitioner claims to belong to 'Mana' Scheduled Tribe, his caste 210-WP-3347.2008(J) 2/4
certificate was referred to the Scrutiny Committee for verification. When the
said proceedings were still pending, orders of promotion were issued to
various Deputy Engineers on 05.11.2004. It is the case of the petitioner that in
the seniority list, the petitioner was placed at serial no.234. However two
other Deputy Engineers who were placed at serial nos. 260 and 263 belonging
to the Scheduled Tribe category came to be promoted before him. A caste
validity certificate was issued to the petitioner on 19.03.2008. This was
pursuant to the directions issued by this Court in Writ Petition No.3459 of
2007 by which the Scrutiny Committee was directed to decide the said
proceedings expeditiously. On receiving the caste validity certificate, the
petitioner made various representations seeking deemed date of promotion in
view of the fact that the juniors to him had been promoted. Since there has
been no response to the said representations, the petitioner has filed the
present writ petition.
2. Shri P.R. Parsodkar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that
in the light of the admitted fact that the petitioner has been issued validity
certificate on 19.03.2008 and he was denied promotion only on the ground
that he did not possess validity certificate, it was clear that after receiving such
validity certificate, he would be entitled to deemed date of promotion being
05.11.2004 when his juniors were promoted. He submits that immediately 210-WP-3347.2008(J) 3/4
after receiving the validity certificate, the petitioner was promoted on
09.06.2008. The only reason for not promoting the petitioner earlier was the
absence of a validity certificate. He therefore submits that the petitioner is
entitled for necessary relief.
3. Ms. Mohini Sharma, learned counsel for the respondents has
opposed the prayers made in the writ petition. It is submitted that since the
petitioner did not possess validity certificate, he was rightly not granted
promotion on 05.11.2004. After the petitioner obtained the validity certificate,
he was promoted on 09.06.2008. Hence the petitioner was not entitled for any
relief whatsoever.
4. On perusing the documents on record we find that on 05.11.2004
the Deputy Executive Engineers at serial nos. 260 and 263 who were junior to
the petitioner and belonging to the Scheduled Tribe category came to be
promoted. The petitioner was placed at serial no. 234 in the said seniority list.
It is only on account of absence of a validity certificate that the petitioner was
not promoted to the post of Executive Engineer. Since the proceedings for
verification were pending when the orders of promotion were issued
on 05.11.2004 coupled with the fact that the petitioner was issued a validity
certificate on 19.03.2008, it is clear that the petitioner would be entitled to the
benefit of such validity certificate. Though the petitioner was promoted on 210-WP-3347.2008(J) 4/4
09.06.2008, he was entitled to be so promoted on 05.11.2004 itself when his
juniors were promoted. There is no reason to deny the relief of grant of
deemed date of promotion to the petitioner. We therefore find that the
petitioner would be entitled to the aforesaid relief. Since the petitioner has
now superannuated, he would be entitled to seek aforesaid benefit only to
receive pensionary benefits.
5. In view of aforesaid, it is held that the petitioner is entitled for
deemed date of promotion from 05.11.2004 on which date his juniors were
promoted. Though the petitioner would not be entitled for any arrears of
salary on the promotional post from 05.11.2004 to 09.06.2008, he would be
entitled to receive pensionary benefits by treating him as having been
promoted on the post of 'Executive Engineer' on 05.11.2004. The respondents
shall take necessary steps in accordance with law expeditiously to grant such
benefits to the petitioner, preferably within a period of three months of receipt
of copy of the judgment.
Rule is made absolute in aforesaid terms. No costs.
(URMILA S. JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S.CHANDURKAR, J.)
Andurkar..
Digitally Signed byJAYANT S ANDURKAR Personal Assistant Signing Date:
09.06.2022 17:50
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!