A.S. CHANDURKAR, J.

1. By this Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who are members of the staff serving in the Family Courts at Aurangabad and Nagpur seek extension of benefits as made available by “Justice Shetty Commission” to the staff of the Family Courts in the entire State.

2. The proceedings were initially filed in public interest. However, as the petitioners were seeking reliefs for their own benefits, by order dated 17.6.2014 the petitioners were permitted to convert the Public Interest Litigation into a regular Writ Petition. After the proceedings were duly converted, the Writ Petition has been heard finally with consent of the parties. Hence, Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally.

3. The petitioners were initially appointed after following the due process of recruitment at the District Court in Aurangabad and Nagpur. Under the Family Courts Act, 1984 (for short, “the said Act”), Family Courts were constituted at Aurangabad and Nagpupr as per Government Resolution dated 21.5.1992. With a view to facilitate the functioning of said Family Courts the petitioners who were regular employees in the District Court at Aurangabad and Nagpur were appointed by way of adhoc arrangement on temporary basis to officiate on various posts in said Family Courts. Necessary orders were issued to each of the petitioners in the year, 1992-93. Since then the petitioners have been discharging their duties in said Family Courts.

4. The State of Maharashtra by Government Resolution dated 20.10.2011 resolved to extend benefits recommended by “Justice Shetty Commission” to the employees working on the establishments of the District Court, subordinate Civil and Criminal Courts, Small Cause Court and City Civil and Sessions Court at Mumbai. The aforesaid benefits were held admissible from 1.4.2003. The staff of the Family Courts in the State of Maharashtra were however not extended said benefit. It is in that background that the petitioners have approached this Court after making due representations to the State of Maharashtra and are therefore praying for grant of benefits as recommended by “Justice Shetty Commission”.

5. In the Writ Petition it has been averred that all the petitioners after their regular appointments were serving in the District Courts at Aurangabad and Nagpur. Their appointments there were on regular basis. On formation of the Family Courts at Aurangabad and Nagpur, the High Court Administration issued orders to each of the petitioners appointing them on the establishment of Family Courts by way of adhoc arrangement on temporary basis to officiate on equivalent posts held by them in the District Courts. It is further averred that though the services of the petitioners have been assigned to said Family Courts, their names appeared in the Gradation List that is maintained by the District and Sessions Court. In this regard, the Gradation List as on 1.4.2012 has been referred to, which includes the names of the petitioners. It is further averred that some of the petitioners were held eligible for grant of benefits under the Assured Career Progression scheme. However, as said petitioners refused the promotional posts, said benefits were subsequently withdrawn. It is further averred that two of the petitioners had sought voluntary retirement from service and the request in that regard was accepted by the learned District and Sessions Judge, Aurangabad. It is further stated that by Government Resolution dated 20.10.2011 the State of Maharashtra implemented the recommendations of “Justice Shetty Commission” in respect of all District Courts and all Civil, Criminal, Small Cause Court employees working under all District Courts as well as the City Civil and Sessions Court, Small Cause Court, the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and other Courts of Magistrates functioning thereunder in the City of Mumbai. These benefits were made admissible from 1.4.2003. It