Rajendra Kashinath Tembhurne vs State Of Maha., Thr. Secretary, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 9788 Bom

                          1

                                          26-9-2022-wp-1194-2022.odt

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
               NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR
              Writ Petition No.1194 of 2022

Rajendra Kashinath Tembhurne,
Aged 58 years,
Occupation- Service,
R/o 48, Welekar Layout,
Manewada Road,
Nagpur 440027.                                          ... Petitioner

     Versus

1.   The State of Maharashtra,
     through its Secretary,
     Department of Higher and Technical
     Education,
     Mantralaya, Mumbai-400032.

2.   The Director of Higher Education,
     State of Maharashtra,
     Central Building,
     Pune-411001.

3.   The Joint Director of Higher Education,
     Nagpur Division, Old Morris College Compound,
     Civil Lines, Nagpur-440001.

4.   Indira Gandhi Arts and Commerce College,
     Kalmeshwar,
     through its Principal,
     Near Police Station,
     Kalmeshwar, Tal. Kalmeshwar,
     Dist. Nagpur 441501.                               ... Respondents


Shri B.G. Kulkarni, Advocate for Petitioner.
Ms     N.P.    Mehta,     Assistant      Government       Pleader      for
Respondent Nos.1 to 3.
Shri V.P. Marpakwar, Advocate for Respondent No.4.


        CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE & G.A. SANAP, JJ.

DATE : 26th SEPTEMBER, 2022

26-9-2022-wp-1194-2022.odt

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.) :

1. Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by

consent of the learned counsel for the parties.

2. We find that the appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer in

Commerce in respondent No.4- College was duly made after following

proper procedure. It is also not in dispute that after termination of the

service of the petitioner, the petitioner was reinstated by way of a

compromise with the Management and this compromise was duly

approved by the respondent No.3- Joint Director of Higher Education,

Nagpur Division, Nagpur on 21-8-2020. If this is so, it is not

permissible in law for the respondent No.3 to re-open the issue of

appointment of the petitioner as Lecturer in Commerce while

considering his request for inclusion of his name in Sevarth System

and on-line payment of salary. This is the view taken by this Court in

several of it's judgments rendered in past, some of which are in Writ

Petition No.8813 of 2021 in the case of Smt. Sanjana Sachin Chougale

(Nee Shilatai Madhukar Dhanvade) Vs. The State of Maharashtra,

through Secretary and others, and in Writ Petition No.8966 of 2021 in

the case of Amol Baban Sangar Vs. State of Maharashtra, through the

Secretary, School Education and Sports Department and others ,

both decided on 24-2-2022.

26-9-2022-wp-1194-2022.odt

3. The petition is, therefore, allowed. The respondent No.3 is

directed to include the name of the petitioner in Sevarth System and

pay the regular salary to the petitioner, including arrears of salary,

if any, within a period of four weeks from the date of the order.

4. Rule is made absolute in above terms. No costs.

                                  (G.A. SANAP, J.)                       (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.)
          Lanjewar




Digitally Signed By :P D
LANJEWAR
Signing Date:27.09.2022
17:54