Dilip S/O Laxman Katlawar vs The State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 2776 Bom

WP 5748-19                                    1                          Judgment

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

                      WRIT PETITION NO. 5748/2019

Dilip S/o Laxman Katlawar,
Aged about 57 years, Occ: Service,
R/o Mul, Tah. Mul, Dist. Chandrapur.                                 PETITIONER

                                .....VERSUS.....

1.    The State of Maharashtra,
      Through its Secretary,
      Department of E.G.S., Mantralaya, Mumbai.
2.    The Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur.
3.    The Collector, Chandrapur, District Chandrapur.             RESPONDENT S

                   Shri N.R. Saboo, counsel for the petitioner.
     Shri A.S. Fulzele, Additional Government Pleader for the respondents.

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M.W. CHANDWANI, JJ.

DATE : MARCH 21, 2023.

ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

RULE. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned

counsel for the parties.

2. The petitioner came to be appointed as Muster Assistant on

05.02.1985 with the respondents. His service came to be terminated on

14.07.1988 and being aggrieved the petitioner filed a complaint under

Section 28 of the Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions and

Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971. The Labour Court on

31.07.1993 allowed the said complaint and ordered reinstatement with

WP 5748-19 2 Judgment

continuity and full back wages from 30.06.1988. The services of the

petitioner came to be absorbed on 10.06.2003. In the matter of grant of

pensionary benefits the petitioner prayed that the services rendered prior

to the order of absorption be taken into consideration. He approached

the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal by filing Original Application

No.215 of 2011. The Tribunal by the order dated 27.09.2018 did not

accept that request and dismissed the original application. Being

aggrieved, the present writ petition has been filed.

3. Shri N.R. Saboo, learned counsel for the petitioner has

submitted that the issue with regard to grant of pensionary benefits to

Muster Assistants has been considered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in

Shaikh Miya S/o Shaikh Chand Versus State of Maharashtra [Civil

Appeal No. 6531-6533/2022] decided on 07.09.2022. It has been held

that notwithstanding the date of absorption in service the date for

reckoning pensionable service ought to be taken as 31.03.1997. Based on

such service, the pensionary benefits can be released. He submits that

this decision has been subsequently followed by a Co-ordinate Bench at

the Principal Seat in Writ Petition No. 446 of 2021 [Md. Khalik

Shahbuddin Shaikh & Others Versus The State of Maharashtra & Others ]

decided on 01.03.2023. It is thus submitted that the petitioner is entitled

for similar relief.

 WP 5748-19                                     3                        Judgment

4.            The     learned   Additional   Government     Pleader     for    the

respondents has relied upon the affidavit-in-reply and has sought to

support the judgment of the Tribunal. However, in the light of the

subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, he submits that

appropriate order be passed.

5. We find that the very same issue as regards entitlement of

Muster Assistants to get pensionary benefits has been considered by the

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Shaikh Miya Shaikh Chand (supra). The

relevant date for reckoning the pensionary benefits is taken as

31.03.1997. We find that the petitioner is similarly situated. Though

appointed on 05.02.1985, he was directed to be treated as in employment

with continuity in service by the Labour Court when the order of

termination dated 14.07.1988 was set aside. Notwithstanding the

absorption of his services on 10.06.2003 in the light of the aforesaid

decision, the petitioner would be entitled to the pensionary benefits by

taking into consideration the relevant date as 31.03.1997.

6. Hence, for aforesaid reasons the impugned judgment of the

Tribunal in Original Application No. 215 of 2011 dated 27.09.2018 is set

aside. It is held that the petitioner is entitled to receive pensionary

benefits by considering his entry in service from 31.03.1997. The

necessary be done with a period of three months from today.

 WP 5748-19                                    4                         Judgment

7.            The writ petition is allowed.       Rule is made absolute in

aforesaid terms. No costs.



              (M.W. CHANDWANI, J.)        (A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.)


APTE