Maroti Vithalrao Kolhe vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 3229 Bom

                                                                                                           1wp 1887.2023.odt
                                                                1

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                               NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

                                WRIT PETITION (WP) NO. 1887/2023
                                           MR. MAROTI VITHALRAO KOLHE
                                                       ..VS..
                                        THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Court's or Judge's Order Coram, appearances, Court's Orders or directions and Registrar's order__________________________________________________________ Mr. A.P. Raghute, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. A.A. Madiwale, Assistant Government Pleader for respondent nos. 1 and 2 Mr. S.S. Ghate, Advocate for respondent no. 5

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND M. W. CHANDWANI, J.J. DATED : 30/03/2023

The petitioner is holding a post of Principal at the respondent no. 4 - College which is situated at village Mohpa, Tq. Kalmeshwar, Dist. Nagpur. He seeks entitlement to continue in service till the age of 65 years by relying upon the Government Resolution dated 05.03.2011. It is submitted that by the said Government Resolution, it is necessary for the College/ Management to undertake the performance review of the Professor/Principal, who has attained the age of 62 years to enable his continuation till the age of 65 years, based on such performance review. Despite making a representation in that regard, the respondent no. 4 has not taken any steps in that regard.

2. A challenge is also raised to the Government Resolution dated 12.07.2016 on the ground that it is not permissible for the Higher and Technical Education Department to dilute/vary the norms prescribed by the respondent no. 3 - University Grants Commission in the matter of age of retirement.

3. Our attention is further invited to the judgment of the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No. 12761/2019 (University

SMGate

1wp 1887.2023.odt

of Mumbai Vs. Satish V. Ratnaparkhi) decided on 28.02.2023 at the Principal Seat. In paragraph no. 16.6, it has been held that the Government Resolution dated 12.07.2016 is contrary to the norms prescribed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). Subsequently, it has been held that age of retirement would be 65 years.

4. While granting time to the respondents to file their affidavit- in-reply, we are inclined to follow the course as adopted in Writ Petition No. 1905/2023 (Dr. Purushottam Yashwantrao Thote and anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. ). Accordingly, it is directed by way of interim relief that the petitioner shall be permitted to function as a Principal at the respondent no. 4 - College without prejudice to the rights and contentions of the parties. The petitioner shall file an undertaking within a period of two weeks from today that he would discharge services from 01.04.2023 without claiming salary for the work done till the age of 65 years and such entitlement would depend upon the final adjudication of the writ petition.

5. In the meanwhile, the respondent no. 4 - College shall take necessary steps to enable the petitioner to receive provisional pension.

6. Stand over four weeks.

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

SMGate