Friday, 08, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Ravi Shamrao Zade And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 5593 Bom

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 5593 Bom
Judgement Date : 20 June, 2022

Bombay High Court
Ravi Shamrao Zade And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 20 June, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Urmila Sachin Phalke
WPs 2783&2880-21                               1           Common Judgment

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 2783/2021

Ramesh s/o Jangu Kulsange,
Aged: 45 years, Occu. Service,
r/o Devhada Tah. Rajura, Distt. Chandrapur.                      PETITIONER

                                 .....VERSUS.....
1.    The State of Maharashtra,
      Through its Secretary,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Adivasi Bhavan, Old Agra Road, Nashik,
      Dist. Nashik.
2.    The Commissioner,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Adivasi Bhavan, Old Agra Road, Nashik,
      Dist. Nashik.
3.    The Assistant Commissioner,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Nagpur Division, Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur.

4.    The Project Officer,
      Integrated Tribal Development Project,
      Chandrapur, Dist. Chandrapur.                            RESPONDENT S

                 Shri S.A. Chaudhari, counsel for the petitioner.
     Shri D.P. Thakare, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.


                                 WITH
                    WRIT PETITION NO. 2800/2021

1.    Ravi Shamrao Zade,
      Age: 33 years, Occ.: Service,
      At Katepalli, Post Devalmari,
      Tq. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli.

2.    Shankar Masa Madavi,
      Age: 38 years, Occ.: Service,
      At post Zinganoor, Tq. Sironcha, Dist. Gadchiroli.

3.    Dhanraj Rajaram Kumre,
      Age: 34 years, Occ.: Service,
      At Dechali, Post Dechalipetha,
      Tq. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli.
 WPs 2783&2880-21                               2           Common Judgment

4.    Satyanarayana Marayya Ganrfwar,
      Age: 36 years, Occ.: Service,
      At post Zinganoor, Tq. Sironcha, Dist. Gadchiroli.        PETITIONERS

                                 .....VERSUS.....

1.    The State of Maharashtra,
      Through its Secretary,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.
2.    The Commissioner,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Adivasi Bhavan, Old Agra Road, Nashik,
      Dist. Nashik.
3.    The Assistant Commissioner,
      Tribal Development Department,
      Nagpur Division, Nagpur, Dist. Nagpur.

4.    The Project Officer,
      Integrated Tribal Development Project,
      Aheri, Tq. Aheri, Dist. Gadchiroli.                      RESPONDENT S


                 Shri N.L. Chaudhari, counsel for the petitioners.
     Shri D.P. Thakare, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.



CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, JJ.

DATE : 20TH JUNE, 2022.

ORAL JUDGMENT          (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)


             Writ Petition No.2783 of 2021 is not on Board.              It is

mentioned as similar issues as are arising in Writ Petition No.2800 of

2021 arise therein. It is accordingly taken on board for disposal.

2. RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

WPs 2783&2880-21 3 Common Judgment

3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that each

petitioner has completed ten years of service since the initial date of

appointment and hence in view of the decision of this Court at

Aurangabad Bench in Writ Petition No.5867 of 2015 (Madhukar

Bhavanrao Sadgir & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others )

dated 31.10.2018, the petitioners are entitled for an order of

regularization of their services. He further submits that after referring to

the aforesaid decision this Court in Writ Petition No.1344 of 2019

(Naresh Nanaji Thakare Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others )

dated 04.03.2021 has issued similar directions. It is therefore prayed that

the petitioners be granted similar relief.

Shri D.P. Thakare, learned Additional Government Pleader for

the respondents seeks time to verify the facts of the case.

4. In the light of the decisions referred to hereinabove, find that

the respondent no.4 can be directed to verify the case of each of the

petitioners and if it is found that each petitioner has completed ten years

of service, identical relief can be granted to them.

5. Hence for the reasons contained in the decision of this Court

in Madhukar Bhavanrao Sadgir & Others (supra), the following order is

passed:-

 WPs 2783&2880-21                            4            Common Judgment

(I)       The respondent no.4 shall examine the case of each of the

petitioners to verify whether each petitioner has completed ten years of service.

(II) Thereafter the respondents shall regularize the services of the petitioners who have completed ten years of service with effect from the date they have completed ten years or the date of filing writ petition, whichever is later.

(III) The petitioners who have completed ten years for all practical purposes, their service shall be considered regular from the date mentioned in Clause (II) above. However, it is made clear that the petitioners would not be entitled to actual financial benefit for the period prior to the date of this order except the honorarium which was already paid all these years to the petitioner. They will be however entitled for the regular pay-scale from the date of this order.

(IV) The respondents shall count the service of the petitioners from the date of appointment continuously for counting ten years of their service.

(V) It is made clear that the petitioners who were appointed and are regularized as Primary Teacher as the case may be shall complete Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) qualification within a period of five years from today and in case of default in completing the said qualification within time prescribed in this order, the State Government in that event shall be empowered to terminate their services on that ground.

(VI) The respondents shall implement this order with a view to regularize the services of the petitioners within three months WPs 2783&2880-21 5 Common Judgment

from today.

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

(URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

APTE

Signed By: Digitally signed byROHIT DATTATRAYA APTE Signing Date:21.06.2022 18:19

 
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