Bombay High Court
Madhukar S/O Mahadevsa Bijve vs Municipal Council Achalpur, Amravati ... on 9 August, 2024
Author: M.W. Chandwani
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote, M. W. Chandwani
1 35-1896-23.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO. 1896/2023
Madhukar S/o Mahadevsa Bijve
Vs.
Municipal Council, Achalpur, through its Chief Officer and others
Office Notes, Office Memoranda Court's or Judge's orders
of Coram, Appearances, Court's
orders or directions and
Registrar's orders
Mr. Jitesh Dudhlani, Advocate for Petitioner
Mr. B.M. Lonare, AGP for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4
CORAM: AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND
M.W. CHANDWANI, JJ.
DATED : 09th AUGUST, 2024
Though the respondent no.1 is served
none appears. The learned Assistant
Government Pleader appears on behalf of
respondent nos.2 to 4.
2. By the order dated 27.10.2016 in Misc.
Civil Application No.1094/2015 (for Review) in
Writ Petition No.757/2012 (Madhukar M. Bijve
Vs. Pradeep Jagtap (CO), Municipal Council,
Achalpur), the statement made by the Regional
Director of Municipal Administration / Divisional
Commissioner, Amravati Division, Amravati, who
was present before the Court, that the petitioner
shall be granted regularization as on 20.4.2001
and also all such other benefits as are made
2 35-1896-23.odt
available as a result of regularization in service,
by the order dated 20.09.2002 to all other
employees, was accepted as an undertaking to
this Court. The employment of the petitioner
thereafter has been regularized. The grievance in
the present petition is that after the
superannuation of the petitioner on 30.09.2001,
he has not been granted pension as the
employment of the petitioner as a Clerk on daily
wages from 24.05.1984 till 30.09.2001 has not
been considered.
3. What is necessary to note, is that in
complaint ULP No.206/2000 (Madhukar Bijve Vs
Municipal Council, Achalpur) by the judgment
dated 11.11.2011, the following has been
directed.
"(1) The complaint is allowed
partly.
(2) It is hereby declared that the
respondents had engaged in an unfair
labour practice under Items 5, 6 and 9
of Schedule IV of the M.R.T.U. &
P.U.L.P. Act.
(3) Respondents shall treat this
complainant as regularized after
completion of five years of service since
his initial appointment and shall pay
the retirement benefits to the
complainant by considering his service
3 35-1896-23.odt
tenure for the purposes of calculation
of the retirement benefits.
(4) Other prayers are dismissed.
(5) No order as to costs."
4. In view of the above directions as
contained in the judgment dated 11.11.2011,
passed by learned Industrial Court Amravati,
which in absence of any challenge by the
respondents therein has attained finality, the
period of employment, will have to be calculated
after completion of five years service of initial
appointment of the petitioner, which initial
appointment is dated 24.05.1984. If this is taken
into consideration then the petitioner would be
completing 12 years of service. The respondents,
therefore, were liable to calculate the qualifying
service by taking into account the directions as
contained in the judgment dated 11.11.2011,
passed by learned Industrial Court in Complaint
ULP No. 206/2000. It is held, that in view of the
mandate of Rule 30 R/w Rule 110(1) & 2(b) of
the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules,
1982, the petitioner has completed the qualifying
service of 10 years for grant of pension. The
petition is accordingly allowed in the above
terms. No costs.
4 35-1896-23.odt
5. The respondents are directed to
process the pension papers of the petitioner in
view of the above findings and ensure the release
of gratuity and pension payable to the petitioner
within a period of three months from today.
(M.W. CHANDWANI, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE,J.)
MP Deshpande
Signed by: Mr. M.P. Deshpande
Designation: PA To Honourable Judge
Date: 12/08/2024 15:53:33
