Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 4676 Bom
Judgement Date : 2 May, 2022
1 wp5000.2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.5000/2021
Kanhaiyyalal S/o Sonbaji Gajbhiye,
aged about 65 Yrs., Occ. Nil,
R/o Borgaon Bazar, Tah. Devri,
Dist. Gondia, now residing at Sawari,
Post Jawaharnagar, Tah-Dist. Bhandara. ... Petitioner
- Versus -
1. The Education Officer (Primary),
Zilla Parishad, Gondia.
2. Adarsh Shikshan Sanstha,
Sawari, Dist. Bhandara, through its
Secretary, At Sawari, Post Jawahar
Nagar, Dist. Bhandara.
3. Accountant General (II),
Account General's Office,
Nagpur. ... Respondents
-----------------
Mr. A.C. Dharmadhikari, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. A.D. Mohgaonkar, Advocate for respondent No.2.
Mr. N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent
No.3.
----------------
2 wp5000.2021
CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 2 MAY 2022
ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.)
Heard Mr. Dharmadhikari, learned counsel for the
petitioner, Mr. Mohgaonkar, learned counsel for respondent No.2
and Mr. Rao, learned Assistant Government Pleader for
respondent No.3. Nobody appears for respondent No.1 though
served.
2. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.
Heard finally by consent of the parties present before the Court.
3. While modifying the order of the School Tribunal,
the learned Single Judge in his well written judgment delivered on
14th March 2022 in Writ Petition No.4369/2013 (Kanhaiyyalal
Gajbhiye V/s. Bhartiya Jagruti Shikshan Sanstha and others) in 3 wp5000.2021
paragraph No.11 has modified the order of the School Tribunal in
the following terms:-
"11. ........
The respondent No.3 - Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, Gondia, is directed to treat the petitioner as having been reinstated in service and superannuated on 30/06/2013. The prayer for grant of back wages is rejected. At the same time, the respondent No.3 is directed to take steps to ensure that the petitioner is given pensionary benefits and all terminal benefits by treating him as having been reinstated in service and superannuated on 30/06/2013 and to process the papers and disburse such benefits to him in accordance with law."
4. The reply of respondent No.1 also shows that now
respondent No.1 has realized the error committed by him while
passing the impugned order wherein he has considered only 26
years of service rendered by the petitioner as qualifying service for
calculating the pensionary benefits payable to the petitioner. In
fact, as directed by the Single Judge in his judgment 14 th March
2022 respondent No.1 ought to have taken into consideration the
entire service of the petitioner as he has been directed to be 4 wp5000.2021
treated as having been reinstated in service and superannuated on
30th June 2013.
5. We, therefore, direct respondent No.1 to treat the
entire service of the petitioner till date he retired on
superannuation on 30th June 2013 as qualifying service for paying
all pensionary benefits.
6. Arrears of the pension and other benefits be paid to
the petitioner within eight weeks from the date of the judgment.
7. Petition is disposed of in the above terms. Rule is
made absolute accordingly. No costs.
(SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)
Tambaskar.
Signed By:NILESH VILASRAO TAMBASKAR Private Secretary
Signing Date:02.05.2022 18:46
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!