Bombay High Court
Ramsing S/O Dasarathsingh Chauhan vs The State Of Maharashtra, Thr. ... on 22 August, 2024
Author: M.S. Jawalkar
Bench: Avinash G. Gharote, Mukulika Shrikant Jawalkar
14. WP 1904 of 2023.odt
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR
WRIT PETITION NO.1904/2023
Ramsing s/o Dasarathsingh Chauhan
...Versus...
The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Medical Education and Drugs
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32 and another
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- -
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders
appearances, Court's orders or directions
and Registrar's orders
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ----- ------------ -
Mr. S.P. Palshikar, Advocate for petitioner
Mr. A.S. Fulzele, Addl. G.P. for respondent nos.1 and 2
CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND
SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.
DATE : 22/08/2024
1. The petition questions the judgment of the
Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, dated 04/07/2022,
where the challenge to the denial of pensionary benefits to the
petitioner, on account of his tribe claim of belonging to the
Scheduled Tribe 'Thakur' having been invalidated by the Caste
Scrutiny Committee by the order dated 03/01/2012, which in
absence of challenge by the petitioner, had attained finality, an
enquiry in the matter was initiated, however, before the same
could be completed, the petitioner superannuated on
31/10/2013, has been rejected.
2. Mr. Palshikar, learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that in terms of the Government Resolution dated
14. WP 1904 of 2023.odt
21/12/2019, the petitioner ought to have been placed on a
supernumerary post for 11 months and only thereafter action
of withdrawal of pensionary benefits could have been initiated.
Since this was not done, the denial of the pensionary benefits,
according to him, is unjustified. In support of his submissions,
learned counsel for the petitioner places reliance upon
Namdeo s/o Dashrath Nikhare Vs. Secretary, Public Works
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32 [Writ Petition
No.547/2021 decided on 23/03/2022] and Ms. Shalini d/o
Purushottam Bokde Vs. The State of Maharashtra, through its
Chief Secretary, 6th floor, Main Building, Mantralaya, Mumbai -
400 032 and others [Writ Petition No.5706/2021 decided on
05/04/2022].
3. However, what is material to note is that both the
judgments are based upon the Government Resolution, dated
21/12/2019 and the absence of placing the petitioner therein
on a supernumerary post before denial of the pensionary
benefits. In the instant matter it is not in dispute that the
petitioner had already superannuated on 31/10/2013 on
account of which, the applicability of the Government
Resolution, dated 21/12/2019 would not arise and therefore,
the claim that the pensionary benefits were denied to the
petitioner without placing him on a supernumerary post, is
clearly untenable. The plea therefore is rejected.
4. Mr. Palshikar, learned counsel for the petitioner
thereafter submits that in spite of the fact that the Rules of
employment permit continuation of the enquiry post
14. WP 1904 of 2023.odt
superannuation and denial of the pensionary benefits is
depending upon its result, no such thing is done, as in spite of
the enquiry having been initiated it was not carried forward,
post the superannuation of the petitioner on 31/10/2013. He,
therefore, submits that on this count, the retiral benefits
cannot be denied to the petitioner. He, however, seeks some
time to place on record the Rules governing the position in this
regard.
5. Regard has also to be had to the language and
effect of Section 10 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Caste,
Scheduled Tribes, De-notified Tribes (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic
Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward
Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste
Certificate Act, 2000, which mandates that in case the
caste/tribe claim is found to be false, the benefit secured on its
basis needs to be withdrawn.
6. List the matter on 28/08/2024.
(SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) (AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)
Wadkar
Signed by: S.S. Wadkar (SSW)
Designation: PS To Honourable Judge
Date: 23/08/2024 13:23:25
