Prakash S/O Shankarrao Raut vs State Of Maha. Ministry Of Revenue ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1107 Bom

36-WP-2072-21                                                     1/4


         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                   NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

                   WRIT PETITION NO.2072 OF 2021

Prakash s/o Shankarrao Raut,
aged about 54 years, presently
working as Sub Divisional Officer,
Washim resident of SDO's Headquarters,
Washim, District Washim                      ... Petitioner

-vs-

1. State of Maharashtra,
   Ministry of Revenue and Forest,
   Mantralaya, Mumbai 4000032,
   through its Additional Chief Secretary

2. Divisional Commissioner, Amravati         ... Respondents


Shri Narayan C. Phadnis, Advocate for petitioner.
Ms N. P. Mehta, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents.

            CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

DATE : February 02, 2023

Oral Judgment : (Per : A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the

learned counsel for the parties.

The petitioner claims to belong to Gond Govari (Scheduled

Tribe). He was appointed as Tahsildar by an order dated 06/01/1998.

During the course of service, the petitioner's tribe-claim was

invalidated by the Scrutiny Committee on 04/07/2002. The order of

invalidation came to be confirmed by this Court in Writ Petition

No.2217/2007. Since the petitioner sought protection of his services, 36-WP-2072-21 2/4

he filed Writ Petition No.5871/2012 and by the order dated

06/12/2012 his services were protected. From 22/02/2019 the

petitioner was holding the post of Sub Divisional Officer, Washim.

The petitioner in the meanwhile sought to voluntary retire from service

and hence moved an application in that regard. By the order dated

02/03/2021 the State Government denied permission to the petitioner

to voluntary retire from service. This was for the reason that he had

been placed on a supernumerary post in the light of Government

Resolution dated 21/12/2019 by the order dated 25/02/2020. In

view of that Government Resolution as well as subsequent Government

Resolution dated 27/11/2020 such stand was taken by the State

Government.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that

by the common judgment dated 16/12/2022 in Writ Petition

No.1485/2020 (Bharatee Balaji Rapatwar vs. The State of Maharashtra

and ors. with connected writ petitions) decided at Aurangabad Bench,

it has been held that in view of Government Resolution dated

14/12/2022 the effect of the earlier Government Resolution dated

22/12/2019 would be neutralized. It is thus submitted that since the

request of the petitioner for seeking voluntary retirement was

subsequently refused on the ground that the report of Study Group was 36-WP-2072-21 3/4

awaited in the light of Government Resolution dated 21/12/2019, the

matter can be re-considered by the State Government in view of the

subsequent events.

3. The learned Assistant Government Pleader supported the

impugned order and submitted that the request for voluntary

retirement has been rightly refused by the State Government. It is

however not disputed that by issuance of Government Resolution dated

14/12/2022 the effect of earlier Government Resolutions dated

21/12/2019 as well as 27/11/2020 has been neutralized. On perusal

of the impugned order dated 02/03/2021, it is seen that the same has

been issued in the light of the fact that the petitioner was placed on a

supernumerary post as per Government Resolution dated 21/10/2019.

As the said Government Resolutions had been superseded and revised

by Government Resolution dated 24/12/2022 it would be necessary to

consider the effect of this Government Resolution on the request made

by the petitioner for grant of permission to voluntary retire from

service. On this count we find that the State Government ought to be

directed to re-consider the petitioner's request for voluntary retirement.

4. Hence in view of issuance of Government Resolution dated

14/12/2022, the order dated 02/03/2021 passed by the State 36-WP-2072-21 4/4

Government is set aside. The respondent No.1 is directed to re-

consider the petitioner's request for seeking voluntary retirement in

accordance with law. The necessary decision be taken within a period

of eight weeks from receipt of copy of this judgment. The decision

taken be communicated to the petitioner. All points raised in the writ

petition are kept open.

With these directions, the writ petition is partly allowed and

disposed of with no order as to costs.

(Mrs Vrushali V. Joshi, J.) (A. S. Chandurkar, J.)

Asmita

Digitally signed byASMITA ADWAIT BHANDAKKAR Signing Date:04.02.2023 15:53:43