Ashok Gulabrao Chavan Decd Thr ... vs The State Of Maharashtra Thr The ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 1916 Bom

                                                          16-WP-14434-2022-production


Pdp
           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   WRIT PETITION NO. 14434 OF 2022

      Ashok Gulabrao Chavan                                .. Petitioner

                   Versus

      The State of Maharashtra & Ors.                      .. Respondents


      Mr. Balaji Shinde for petitioner.
      Mrs. R. A. Salunkhe, AGP for State.
      Mr. Vivek B. Rane i/by Mr. Ashwin R. Kapadnis for
      respondent nos.4 and 5.
              CORAM: S. V. GANGAPURWALA, ACTING CJ. &
                     SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.

              DATE:        FEBRUARY 27, 2023


      P.C.:

1. Not on board. Upon mentioning taken on board.

2. The petitioner claims to have been appointed in the year 1974. The petitioner is untrained teacher. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was continued in service and on attaining the age of superannuation, retired from the service as Assistant Teacher of the Zilla Parishad. According to the learned counsel, the petitioner is entitled for pensionary benefits. The same relief is not accorded to the petitioner. The State Government also issued circular dated 15th July, 2022 to implement the order passed by this Court.

3. The learned counsel for the Zilla Parishad is present.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner relies on the

16-WP-14434-2022-production

judgment of the Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad dated 4th July, 2019 in Writ Petition No. 6143 of 2016 (Smt. Umabai W/o Ramkrishna Deshmukh vs. The State of Maharashtra & Ors.) and another judgment of the Division Bench of this Court dated 24th August, 2020 in Writ Petition No. 3912 of 2019 (Sonu P. Kapadne & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra).

5. The petitioner shall file a comprehensive representation with the respondents. The respondents shall consider the representation filed by the petitioner and also the judgments delivered by this Court, referred to above and take decision with regard to the pensionary benefit of the petitioner expeditiously, preferably within four months from the date of receipt of the representation.

6. With these observations, writ petition is disposed of. No costs.

                       (SANDEEP V. MARNE, J.)               (ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE)


          Digitally
          signed by
          PRAVIN
PRAVIN    DASHARATH
DASHARATH PANDIT
PANDIT    Date:
          2023.03.01
          16:19:27
          +0530