Back
G. S. PATEL, NEELA GOKHALE
Pradeep Rangrao Nalawade – Appellant
Versus
Poona College of Pharmacy – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NEELA GOKHALE, J.
1. Rule. The contesting Respondents have filed Affidavits in Reply. Heard by consent of parties. Rule is made returnable forthwith.
2. The Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to condone a gap in his service, which in turn entitles him to retirement benefits. He further seeks quashing of an Order dated 4th January 2022 passed by the 3rd Respondent rejecting his representation for condoning the gap in service as claimed by Respondents.
3. The Petitioner worked as an Assistant Professor in the 1st Respondent College of the 2nd Respondent University, till his superannuation. The 3rd Respondent is the Directorate of Technical Education of the 4th Respondent State of Maharashtra.
4. The emerging facts in the case are that prior to the Petitioner being employed in the 1st Respondent college, he served as Principal in Maharashtra College of Pharmacy from 19th April 1987 to 18th August 1991. There was approval of the 3rd Respondent to his said employment. Thereafter, he served as Principal at the Institute of Pharmacy run by the Shivajinagar Vidya Prasarak Mandal, for two years on probation period after which his services were confirmed. He served there fo
The central legal point established in the judgment is the importance of liberal construction of pensionary provisions as a social welfare measure, emphasizing the entitlement of government servants ....
The purpose of condoning interruptions in service is to make an employee entitled to the pension by adding the days of service, not to enhance the pension.
The purpose of condoning interruptions in service is to make an employee eligible for pension by adding the days of service, not to enhance the pension.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the determination of continuous service for pension benefits and the applicability of the Old Pension Scheme or the New DCPS based on the date of c....
The entitlement to pension and retirement benefits is a rightful due upon rendering the required length of service, and the authorities' inaction in regularizing a break in service cannot justify den....
Eligibility for pension benefits requires continuous service without voluntary breaks; prior service in different institutions does not automatically qualify unless condoned.
Interruption in service of an employee will not count for pension: Provided that regular service before interruption is eligible to be reckoned as qualifying service for pension and period of such in....
The court emphasized that periods of service in unaided colleges, when accompanied by a lien and salary from the aided institution, should count towards qualifying service for pension benefits.
The delay in appointing the petitioner is solely attributable to the conduct of the respondent authorities, and the date of appointment should be treated notionally for computing the period of qualif....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
