Bombay High Court
Narayan S/O Laxmanrao Wankhede vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Its ... on 21 November, 2022
Bench: A.S. Chandurkar, Anil Laxman Pansare
WP 3380-2022 1 Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 3380 OF 2022
Narayan s/o Laxmanrao Wankhede,
aged 59 years, Occ. Retired,
R/o Plot No. 59-A, Shriram Wadi,
Behind Shivraj School, Ayodhya Nagar,
Nagpur.
PETITIONER
.....VERSUS.....
1. The State of Maharashtra,
through its Chief Secretary,
6th Floor, Main Building, Mantralaya,
Mumbai - 400032.
2. Nagpur Municipal Corporation,
Nagpur, through its Commissioner,
Civil Lines, Nagpur - 440024.
RESPONDENT S
Shri S.D. Borkute, Advocate for the petitioner.
Shri A.A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1/ State.
Shri J.B. Kasat, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.
DATE : 21/11/2022
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned
counsel for the parties.
2. The petitioner entered service as Fireman with the Nagpur
Municipal Corporation on 15/6/1984. The petitioner's entry in service
was on the post reserved for 'Dhoba' Scheduled Tribe. In the year 2004,
the petitioner's tribe claim was invalidated. In view of Government
WP 3380-2022 2 Judgment
Resolution dated 15/6/1995, he was continued in service as belonging to
the Other Backward Class category. The petitioner obtained validity
certificate of belonging to 'Dhobi' Other Backward Class category on
20/3/2012. During the course of service, the petitioner was placed on a
supernumerary post in view of Government Resolution dated
21/12/2019. The petitioner thereafter superannuated on 27/11/2020.
His retiral benefits have been withheld and hence this Writ Petition.
3. The learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that after
invalidation of the petitioner's tribe claim, he was granted protection in
service in view of Government Resolution dated 15/6/1995. The
employer in terms of that Government Resolution placed him in the Other
Backward Class category and his name was shown in the seniority list
accordingly. Having protected his service and having permitted him to
superannuate, there was no reason to withhold the petitioner's retiral
benefits. In support, the learned Counsel for the petitioner placed reliance
on the decision in Raja Tukaram Shinde Vs. The State of Maharashtra &
Anr. [Writ Petition No. 903/2020 decided on 4/5/2021] as well as in
Moreshwar s/o Ramchandra Hadke Vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
[Writ Petition No. 14820/2021 decided on 16/3/2022] at the
Aurangabad Bench. The impugned communication dated 12/5/2021
requiring the employer to await the recommendations of the Study Group
and thereafter the policy decision of the State Government was not
WP 3380-2022 3 Judgment
warranted in these facts. It is therefore prayed that the retiral benefits of
the petitioner be directed to be released.
4. In the reply filed on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, it
has been stated that the petitioner was placed on a supernumerary post
pursuant to the Government Resolution dated 21/12/2019. This was in
view of the order dated 9/1/2020. In the light of the Government
Resolution dated 21/12/2019, unless report of the Study Group was
received, the petitioner was not entitled for pensionary benefits. He
further submitted that the relief as prayed for was not liable to be
granted.
5. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and we
have perused the documents on record. It is undisputed that after
invalidation of the petitioner's tribe claim, his services were protected by
relying upon the Government Resolution dated 15/6/1995. The
petitioner's services were protected as belonging to the Other Backward
Class category. His name was also included in the seniority list as
belonging to that category. In this backdrop, when the Corporation itself
protected the services of the petitioner and placed him in the Other
Backward Class category, there does not appear to be any justification to
await the recommendations of the Study Group and thereafter the policy
decision of the State Government. It is undisputed that after being placed
WP 3380-2022 4 Judgment
in the Other Backward Class category, the petitioner has obtained validity
certificate dated 20/3/2012 of belonging to 'Dhobi' Other Backward Class
category. He was permitted to superannuate on 27/11/2020. We find
that the Division Bench in Raja Tukaram Shinde (supra) has considered
the effect of the orders of protection granted by this Court and the effect
of non-release of pensionary benefits thereafter. In the present case, the
employer itself has granted such protection and hence in these facts, it
would not be necessary to await the recommendations of the Study Group
and thereafter the policy decision of the State Government.
6. For the aforesaid reasons, there does not appear to be any
justification in issuing the impugned communication dated 12/5/2021 to
the petitioner in that regard. Respondent No.2 - Municipal Corporation is
directed to release the pensionary benefits of the petitioner pursuant to
his superannuation on 27/11/2020. Needful be done within a period of
six weeks from receipt of copy of this judgment.
7. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)
SUMIT
