SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Article Pause Article
judgment-img

2018 Supreme(Bom) 246

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
S.S. SHINDE, S.M. GAVHANE, JJ.
Nita Bhagwan Ware - Appellant
Versus
The State of Maharashtra Through the Secretary, School Education Department & Others - Respondent
Writ Petition No. 3851 of 2016
Decided On : 24-02-2018

Advocates Appeared:
For the Petitioner:A.G. Chaudhari, Advocate.
For the Respondents: S.Y. Mahajan, Addl.G.P.

Headnote:

Maharashtra Civil Services [Pension] Rules, 1982 - Order it may pleased be declared - Order impugned - Service is countable for pension – Petitioner Ware came to be appointed on as a Part Time Librarian with respondent no.4 school. His services came to be confirmed on - Services of the husband of the petitioner came to be confirmed as a Full Time Librarian with respondent no.4 school on - Respondent no.3 has also approved upgradation from Part Time Librarian to Full Time Librarian with effect from vide its approval letter - It is further the case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner expired on while discharging his duties as Librarian. The petitioner has also challenged the order of withdrawal of the approval given to deceased husband of the petitioner in the scale of trained graduate teacher by filing Writ Petition said Writ Petition came to be allowed - Accounts Officer, Education Department Zilla Parishad Beed vide its order dated revised pay scale of the husband of the petitioner and made fixation of the husband of the petitioner in the pay scale of trained graduate - Held, In the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of respondent no.3 there is no denial to the strength of the students shown in every year from the year - Husband of the petitioner was only part-time Librarian serving in the said school. Perusal of the said certificate would make it abundantly clear that the strength of the students from the year till is more than every year. The Division Bench of the Bombay High Court Bench at in Writ Petition had occasioned to interpret the Government Resolution issued by School Education Department and considering the prayer of the petitioners therein seeking relief of upgradation of post of part-time Librarian to fulltime Librarian, the Court held that in terms of the aforesaid Government Resolution, on number of students exceeding post of Part Time Librarian is upgraded to the post of Full Time Librarian. In the facts of that case - Court held that though petitioners therein have been upgraded on the post of Full Time Librarian with effect from April they are entitled for similar treatment as has been granted by order dated 9th February in respect of the similarly situated employees - Writ Petition is allowed

JUDGMENT :

S.S. SHINDE, J.

1. Heard. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith, and heard finally with the consent of the parties.

2. This Petition is filed with the following prayers:

(B) By issuing appropriate writ, directions, order it may pleased be declared that deceased Bhagan Ware shall be considered as Full time Liberian from the date of his initial appointment i.e. 24/6/1996 in view of the fact that the strength of students was more that 1000 as stated in government resolution dated 28/6/1994.

(C) By issuing appropriate writ, direction, order it may pleased be declare that the date on which the decease Bhagwan Ashruba Ware was appointed i.e. 24/6/1996 shall be consider for notional pay fixation and for other retiral and pensionary benefits.

(D) By issuing appropriate writ, direction, order the impugned communications dated 26/9/2014 and 4/6/2015 may kindly be quashed and set aside.

(E) By issuing appropriate writ, direction, order, respondent authorities may kindly be directed to grant family pension to the petitioner by considering the initial date of the appointment i.e. 24/6/1996 of the deceased Bhagwan Ashruba Ware as a full time Liberian and to grant pensionary benefits accordingly.

3. Brief facts leading for filing the Writ Petition are as under:

It is the case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Bhagwan Ashruba Ware, came to be appointed on 24.06.1996 as a Part Time Librarian with respondent no.4 school. His services came to be confirmed on 22.06.1998. The services of the husband of the petitioner came to be confirmed as a Full Time Librarian with respondent no.4 school on 14.03.2007. Respondent no.3 has also approved upgradation from Part Time Librarian to Full Time Librarian with effect from 14.03.2007, vide its approval letter dated 16.03.2007. It is further the case of the petitioner that the husband of the petitioner expired on 14.01.2011, while discharging his duties as Librarian. The petitioner has also challenged the order of withdrawal of the approval given to the deceased husband of the petitioner in the scale of trained graduate teacher by filing Writ Petition No.7970/2011. The said Writ Petition came to be allowed. The Accounts Officer, Education Department, Zilla Parishad, Beed, vide its order dated 23.07.2012, revised the pay scale of the husband of the petitioner and made fixation of the husband of the petitioner in the pay scale of trained graduate. The office of respondent no.5 has also approved family pension in favour of the present petitioner.

4. It is further the case of the petitioner that the petitioner was receiving monthly family pension regularly from 07.09.2012 till January, 2014. The office of respondent no.5 has issued communication dated 19.02.2014 pointing out that the husband of the petitioner was appointed as Librarian on part time basis with effect from 24.06.1996. As per the Secondary School Code, it has been clearly stated that only full time service is countable for pension/family pension. However, after excluding the part time service period, the actual service starts from 01.04.2006 which is after the stipulated date of 01.11.2005 from which pensionary benefits in terms of the Maharashtra Civil Services [Pension] Rules, 1982. Thus, in view of the Government Resolution dated 31.10.2005, the husband of the petitioner is not eligible for pensionary benefits. The above referred communication was forwarded to respondent no.5 and present petitioner by respondent no.3, vide its letter dated 14.07.2014. The office of respondent no.5, vide its letter dated 26.09.2014 giving reference of earlier letter dated 19.02.2014, directed the Treasury Officer, Beed, to stop the family pension of the present petitioner. On the basis of above mentioned letters, respondent no.3 directed respondent no.4 school to initiate recovery as against the amount given to the petitioner under the family pension.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that the State of Maharashtra










Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top