[Cites 1, Cited by 0]
Bombay High Court
Naresh Dattatrey Patil And Ors vs State Of Maharashtra Thr Its Secretary ... on 22 December, 2025
Author: Ravindra V. Ghuge
Bench: Ravindra V. Ghuge
2025:BHC-AS:56899-DB
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Digitally signed
by GAYATRI
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
GAYATRI RAJENDRA
RAJENDRA SHIMPI CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SHIMPI Date:
2025.12.23
11:30:44 +0530
WRIT PETITION NO. 16136 OF 2025
1. Ashok Dattatreya Patil
Age: 66 Yrs., Occ. Retired
R/o. MIDC Road Vagholl,
Kamarle, Alibaug,
Dist. Raigarh, 402201
2. Smt. Sushma Damodar Sawant
Age. 57, Occ. Service,
R/o. Post - Khalapur,
Someshwar CHS. Ltd.
Tal. Khalapur, District: Raigad, 410202
3. Shri. Chandrakant Bhila Panpatil
Age. 60 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Sabai Nagar, Khalapur,
Tal. Khalapur, Dist. Raigad
4. Shri. Rajendra Shamkant Chorghe
Age. 59 Yrs. Occ. Retired
R/o. 94, Bhavani Pakhadi,
Near Bhavani Mandir,
Dist. Raigad 402401
5. Shri. Chandrakant Raghunath Salve
Age. 56 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. Pamchayat Samiti Khalapur,
Tal. Khalapur, Dist Raigad.
6. Smt. Vasudha Shrikrishna Patil
Age. 72 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Pantnagar, Chendhare,
Alibag, Dist Raigad - 402201
7. Shri. Tanaji Chokhaji Thorat
Age. 76 yrs., Occ. Retired,
R/o. Thorat Niwas, Sudhagad,
Gayatri Shimpi 1
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Parali, Dist Raigad-410205.
8. Shri. Shashikant Sitaram Markande
Age. 68 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Dabak Pakhadi, Shrivardhan,
District: Raigad - 402110
9. Shri Ganesh Naresh Palvankar
Earlier known as
Ganesh Naresh Kumbhar
Age. 66 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Post-Amli Road,
Opp, Amli Primry School,
Walake, District: Raigad - 402202
10. Shri. Kashinath Narayan Raut
Age. 73 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. House No. 2258, Near Tulad
Devi Mandir, Chaul, Tulad Devi,
Alibaug, Post Chaul,
District: Raigad - 402203
11. Shri. Vishnu Vasant Mhatre
Age. 70 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Mani Post-Thal, Alibag,
Dist Raigad 402207
12. Shri. Rambhau Hasha Mhatre
Age. 73 Yrs, Occ. Retired
R/o. Veena APT, Godavari Nagar
Chinchapada pen, Pen,
Tal. Pen, Dist. Raigad.
13. Shri. Avinash Kashiram Naik
Age. 65 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
Karla, Khandala, Alibaug,
Dist Raigad 402201
14. Shri. Sunil Jagram Chavan
Age. 49, Occ. Service,
R/o. Flat No. G-2, Pournima
Gayatri Shimpi 2
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
CHS. Ltd., Neral Kalam Road,
Near Agri Samaj Hall,
Bopele, Neral, Dist Raigad.
15. Shri Manoranjan Shivaram Mane
Age: 56 Yrs., Occupation: Service
R/o. Post Dhakawade, Mandave,
Tal. Alibaug. Dist. Raigad.
16. Shri. Avinash Shivappa Kambale
Age. 66 Yrs., Occ. Retired,
R/o. Pamchayat Samiti
Uran, Tal. Uran, Dist Raigad.
17. Shri. Bhaulal Bhagu Rathod
Age: 56 Yrs., Occupation: Service
R/o. 202, Second floor,
Kumbhar Ali, R.G. Nagar, Neral,
Dist. Raigad
18. Shri. Santosh Jagannath Bodke.
Age: 50 Yrs., Occupation: Service
R/o. Flat no.6 Adyashakti CHS Ltd.
Hirawadi Road, Bappa Sitaram,
Shivam Nagar, Nashik, Dist. Nashik.
19. Shri. Suresh Bhaurao Shrote
Age. 54, Occ. Service,
R/o. A-4, Shivam Apl.,
Kacheri Road, Anand Nagar,
Karjat, Dist. Raigad
20. Shri. Nitin Ramchandra Patil
Age. 61 Yrs.,R/o. Ambepur,
Post Pozari, Tal. Alibaug,
Dist. Raigad.
21. Shri. Shabbir Karim Patel
Age. 54, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Custom Office Road,
Mandavi Mohalla, Alibaug,
Gayatri Shimpi 3
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Dist. Raigad
22. Smt. Mandakini Bajrang Sasane
Age. 68 Yrs, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Shri. Guruprasad Niwas,
Neral Pada Raod,
Near Nationalist Congress Office,
Neral, Dist. Raigad 410201
23. Yuvraj Jagatsingh Rajput
Age. 68 Yrs, Occ. Retired
R/o. Panchayat Samiti Khalapur,
Tal. Khalapur, Dist. Raigad 410201 ... Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra Thro. Its
Secretary The Department of
General Administration
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032
2. The State Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Rural Development Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai
3. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad Raigad,
District: Raigad ... Respondents
WITH
(507) WRIT PETITION NO. 17460 OF 2025
1. Mr. Naresh Dattatrey Patil
Age: 54 Yrs., Occ. Service
R/o. Alibaug Tal. Alibaug
Dist. Raigad
2. Shri. Mahendra Balkrushna Palwankar
Age. 64, Occ. Retired,
R/o. Post- Borli Mandala Tal. Murud
Gayatri Shimpi 4
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Dist. Raigad
3. Shri. Vishnu Shankar Kamtekar
Since deceased through Legal Representative
Smt. Ujwala Vishnu Kamtekar
Age. 58 Yrs, Occ. Household,
R/o. Alibaug Tal. Alibaug
Dist. Raigad
4. Smt. Maya Dinesh Magar
Age. 63 Yrs. Occ. Retired
R/o. Alibaug Tal. Alibaug
Dist. Raigad
5. Shri. Sachin Bhiku Bhagat
Age. 48 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. Shrivardhan, Tal. Shrivardhan,
Dist Raigad.
6. Shri. Rajan Mahadu Thale
Age. 52 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. A/P Sudhagad Pali,
Tal. Sudhagad Pali, Dist Raigad
7. Shri. Dilipkumar Ganpat Patil
Since deceased through
Legal Representative
Smt. Nilam Dilipkumar Patil
Age. 54 yrs., Occ. Household,
R/o. A/P Alibaug, Tal. Alibaug
Dist Raigad.
8. Shri. Narayan Hira Rathod
Age. 52 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. A/P Sudhagad Pali,
Tal. Sudhagad Pali, Dist Raigad
9. Shri. Rajendra Harishchandra Gaikwad
Age. 52 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. A/P Alibaug, Tal.
Alibaug Dist Raigad.
Gayatri Shimpi 5
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
10. Smt. Sujata Subhash Mhatre
Age. 56 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. A/P Alibaug, Tal.
Alibaug Dist Raigad.
11. Shri. Premsing Macchindra Girase
Age. 53 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. Karjat, Dist Raigad
12. Shri. Narayan Govind Keni
Age. 52 Yrs, Occ. Service
R/o. Panvel, Dist. Raigad.
13. Shri. Vijay Anandsing Rajput
Age. 54 Yrs, Occ. Service,
R/o. Karjat, Dist Raigad. ... Petitioners
Versus
1. State of Maharashtra Thro. Its
Secretary The Department of
General Administration
Mantralaya, Mumbai 400 032
2. The State Maharashtra
Through its Secretary,
Rural Development Department
Mantralaya, Mumbai
3. The Chief Executive Officer,
Zilla Parishad Raigad,
District: Raigad ... Respondents
****
Mr. Mahesh Rawool, Advocate for the Petitioners in both matters.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl. GP a/w Ms. Nisha Mehra, AGP for Respondent -
State in WP No. 16136 of 2025.
Ms. Priyanka Chavan, AGP for Respondent - State in WP No. 17460 of
2025.
****
Gayatri Shimpi 6
::: Uploaded on - 23/12/2025 ::: Downloaded on - 23/12/2025 20:32:35 :::
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND
ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE : 22nd DECEMBER, 2025
ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
1. Writ Petition No. 17460 of 2025 is not on board. On
mentioning, taken on the production board.
2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally by
the consent of the parties.
3. The learned Advocate for Petitioners submits, on
instructions, that the challenge to the Government Resolutions (G.R.)
dated 24th August, 2017 and 15th December, 2022, is not being pressed.
The Petitioners pray that relief in terms of the existing G.R.s, which are
considered in the final order dated 3rd December, 2024 passed by this
Court in Writ Petition No. 19 of 2024 (Shivram Shantaram More &
Ors. v/s. State of Maharashtra & Ors.), be granted.
4. The learned Additional G.P. submits that if the Petitioners
are challenging the two G.R.s, the State will have to file an affidavit in
reply.
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
5. Since the Petitioners are seeking relief in the light of the
order dated 3rd December, 2024 in Shivram Shantaram More (Supra),
and are not pressing their prayers against the GRs, the Petitions can be
disposed off in terms of the said order.
6. The Petitioners are identically placed. All of them refer to
the Government Resolution dated 24th August, 2017 insofar as grant of
advance increment is concerned. By the said Government Resolution, a
decision was taken not to continue with the benefit of advance increment
during the 6th Pay Commission regime in between 1st October, 2006 to
1st October, 2015.
7. In various Judgments of this Court, it was consistently held
that the Government Resolution dated 24th August, 2017, would operate
prospectively and would not have the effect of retrospective denial of
advance increments. The State Government and various Zilla Parishads
had filed Review Petitions seeking review of various orders passed by
this Court. It was inter-alia sought to be contended in the said Review
Petitions that, even though the ultimate decision for stoppage of the
scheme for advance increments might have been taken on 24th August,
2017, it was earlier directed by a Circular dated 3rd July, 2009, to
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
undertake the exercise of pay fixation as per the 6th Pay Commission
Pay scales without taking into consideration the advance increments.
8. By Judgment and order dated 30th August, 2022, this Court
has rejected the Review Petitions after considering all the objections
raised by the State Government. It was held that, no specific instructions
were issued before 24th August, 2017 for discontinuation of the scheme
of advance increments. Paragraph Nos.12 to 15 of the Judgment and
order dated 30th August, 2022, passed in Review Application (Civil)
No.170 of 2022 in Writ Petition No.13760 of 2019 (The State of
Maharashtra and Anr. vs. Rupchand S/o. Narayan Shinde and Ors.),
read as under :
"12. After having heard learned Counsels at length, we
find that the review applicants have not been able to point
out any specific instructions issued prior to
24.08.2017/04.09.2018 for discontinuation of the schemes
for grant of advance increments. Government Resolution
dated 27.02.2009 and Circular dated 03.07.2009 do not
indicate that any final decision was taken for
discontinuation of schemes for advance increments. We
proceed to examine the Government Resolution dated
27.02.2009 and Circular dated 03.07.2009 in details.
13. Government Resolution dated 27.02.2009 came to be
issued by the State Government essentially for conveying
the decision of the State Government about acceptance or
otherwise of various recommendations made by the Hakim
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Committee constituted for implementation of
recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission. In
Annexure to the said Government Resolution, each
recommendation and decision of the State Government
thereon have been enumerated. So far as the scheme for
advance increment is concerned, the same is to be found at
serial number 27 of the Annexure (para 3.24 of Committees
Report). In that paragraph, the Committee recommended
that for employees/ Officers rendering outstanding service,
increment @ 4% be awarded instead of 3% and such
increment be granted once in 5 years. It was further
recommended that since increment at higher rate was
being granted, the then existing scheme for grant of one or
two advance increments be discontinued. However, in the
column 'Decision of State Government' against para 3.24,
remark is made stating that 'separate action would be
taken by General Administration Department'. As against
various other recommendations, the remark 'accepted' has
been made. The recommendation made in para 3.24 by the
Hakim Committee was not accepted at least on the date of
issuance of Government Resolution dated 27.02.2009 and
General Administration Department was to take a decision
thereon separately. Thus, it cannot be inferred that any
specific decision was taken by the State Government on
27.02.2009 for discontinuation of
scheme for grant of advance increment. Therefore, we do
not find that the orders under review need to be disturbed
on the basis of the Government Resolution dated
27.02.2009.
14. Now, we come to the Circular dated 03.07.2009. By
the said Circular, it was directed that the issue of
discontinuation of scheme for grant of advance increment
was under consideration with the State Government and
that some time was required for taking final decision.
Therefore, it was further directed that temporarily the pay
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
fixation of the employees in the 6th Pay Commission scales
be made without considering the advance increments.
Thus, the Circular dated 03.07.2009 was clearly issued as
a temporary measure. The said circular did not
communicate any decision to the effect that the State
Government discontinued the scheme for grant of advance
increments. Therefore, we find that the reliance of Mr. Dixit
on the Circular dated 03.07.2009 is again of no avail.
15. We have carefully gone through the Government
Resolution dated 24.08.2017 and Circular dated
04.09.2018. By the Government Resolution dated
24.08.2017, final decision came to be taken in respect of
recommendation made by the Hakim Committee in para
3.24 of its report directing that during the period from
01.10.2006 to 01.10.2015 when revised pay scales as per
6th Pay Commission were admissible, the benefit of
advance increments should not be granted. Thus, the final
decision on para 3.24 of Committees Report was taken by
the State Government only on 24.08.2017. However,
instead of simply directing that the scheme for grant of
advance increments is discontinued, the State Government
sought to give retrospective effect to its decision by
directing that the benefit of such advance increments be not
given during the period from 01.10.2006 to 01.10.2015.
While issuing such orders having retrospective effect, the
State Government lost sight of the fact that several
employees were already granted the benefit of advance
increments during the relevant period. As we have
observed earlier, the deliberations for discontinuation of
the scheme started only on 27.02.2009/03.07.2009 and
prior to that, admittedly, the issue of discontinuation of the
scheme for grant of advance increment was not even under
consideration. The instructions for temporarily doing pay
fixation without advance increments were issued on
03.07.2009. This means that several employees must have
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
already been granted advance increments during the
period from 01.10.2006 to 03.07.2009. We, therefore, fail to
comprehend as to how the State Government could have
issued directions on 24.08.2017 that the benefit of advance
increments should not be granted from 01.10.2006
onwards. Even in respect of employees becoming eligible
for grant of advance increments after 27.02.2009, we do
not find any error in the view taken by this Court that the
Government Resolution dated 27.08.2017 would only have
prospective effect."
9. Thus, it is now a well settled position that the scheme of
grant of advance increments was discontinued for the first time by the
Government Resolution dated 24th August, 2017 and that, such decision
would only operate prospectively.
10. These Writ Petitions are, therefore, disposed off with the
declaration that the Government Resolution dated 24th August, 2017,
would apply prospectively. The Petitioners in these Petitions are held to
be eligible for grant of advance increments for outstanding work, prior to
24th August, 2017. Since the Petitioners are not claiming interest, the
recovered amount shall be paid to the Petitioners within a period of 45
days, failing which, the amount shall carry interest at the rate of 6% from
the date of recovery, till it is actually paid. All consequential benefits be
calculated by adding up the said advance increments. Since the
11-WP-16136-2025.odt
Petitioners have superannuated, all consequential benefits post
recalculation, be paid to the Petitioners within 90 days.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)
