Wednesday, 13, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Madhukar S/O Somaji Jambhule vs The Md,Mah.State ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5091 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5091 Bom
Judgement Date : 7 June, 2022

Bombay High Court
Madhukar S/O Somaji Jambhule vs The Md,Mah.State ... on 7 June, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Urmila Sachin Phalke
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

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter