Prakash Dadarao Mhaske vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 263 Bom

Bombay High Court

Prakash Dadarao Mhaske vs State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, ... on 5 January, 2024

Author: M.M.Sathaye

Bench: Nitin Jamdar, M.M.Sathaye

                                                            1             95 CP-700-22=.doc


                           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                    CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 700 OF 2022

                   Prakash Dadarao Mhaske                          ...Petitioner
                             Versus
                   State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary,
                   Ministry Of Education And Ors.                  ...Respondents

SNEHA                                                ****
NITIN
CHAVAN             Mr. S. S. Kanetkar for the Petitioner.
Digitally signed
                   Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for the Respondents/State.
by SNEHA
NITIN CHAVAN
Date: 2024.01.08
                                                     ****
18:18:14 +0530


                                                      CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND
                                                              M.M.SATHAYE, JJ.

DATE : 5 JANUARY 2024

P.C. :

. The grievance made by the Petitioner is that the order dated 28 April 2022 passed by this Court is not complied with. For the benefit of the Respondents, we reproduce the operative portion of the order:

"6. We find that the judgment of the Full Bench in Deshmukh Dilipkumar Bhagwan (supra) clearly supports the case of the Petitioner and the Petitioner would be entitled to benefit under the old pension scheme. Hence, for the aforesaid reasons, the impugned communication dated 29 April 2021 is set aside. It is directed that the services of the Petitioner would be governed by the old pension scheme. The Respondent Nos.3 and 4 shall take all necessary steps to ensure that the Petitioner gets such

Sneha Chavan

2 95 CP-700-22=.doc

benefit within a period of three months from the production of this order. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms. No costs."

2. The Division Bench has clearly directed that the Petitioner would be governed by the old pension scheme. That being the position, the Respondents will have to give effect of this order. The reply affidavit however does not deal with this order and seeks to comment on the merits of the same.

3. We give one more opportunity to the Respondents to comply with the order dated 20 April 2022. For that purpose, hearing of this petition is deferred to 21 February 2024, failing which we will have to proceed under the contempt jurisdiction.

(M.M.SATHAYE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.)

Sneha Chavan