Advocates:
['CHETAN S DHORE', '', 'ANUP SHANKAR DHORE', 'RAVINDRA LAXMANRAO KHAPRE', 'D M SURJUSE', 'GOVERNMENT PLEADER', '', 'FOR']

1

wp2413.17.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO.2413 OF 2017

Sheshrao @ Shekhar s/o.

Pusaramji Surjuse, Aged 64 years,

Occ. Retired, r/o. Flat No.102,

Gokul Apartments, 80, Nawab

Lane, Gokulpeth, Nagpur.

…....... PETITIONER

// VERSUS //

1.State of Maharashtra,

Through Principal Secretary,

Law and Judiciary Department.

Madam Kama Road, Hutatma

Rajguru Square, Mantralaya,

Mumbai-32.

2.State of Maharashtra,

Through Principal Secretary,

Food, Civil Supplies and

Consumer Protection Department,

Madam Kama Road, Hutatma

Rajguru Square, Mantralaya,

Mumbai-32.

2

wp2413.17.odt

3.State of Maharashtra,

Through Principal Secretary,

Finance Department,

Madam Kama Road, Hutatma

Rajguru Square, Mantralaya,

Mumbai-32.

4.(The Lokayukta,

State of Maharashtra)

(Deleted vide Court’s order

dt.20.4.2017)

………

RESPONDENTS

____________________________________________________________

Mr.R.L.Khapre, Senior Advocate assisted by Mr.D.R.Khapre

and Mr.D.M.Surjuse, Counsel for the petitioner.

Mrs.Kalyani Deshpande, A.G.P. for Respondent nos.1 to 3.

********

Date of reserving the Judgment : 2^nd February,

2021.

Date of pronouncement of the Judgment : 5^th February,

2021.

********

CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ. and

PUSHPA V. GANEDIWALA, J.

JUDGMENT (Per Dipankar Datta, CJ) :

1.

The issue we are tasked to resolve is, whether the

petitioner is entitled to draw pension.

3

wp2413.17.odt

2.

Resolving the aforesaid issue would require noticing

the basic facts giving rise to this writ petition.

3.

The petitioner, born on 12^th October, 1952, joined the

Maharashtra Judicial Service as a Civil Judge (Junior

Division) on 3^rd December, 1990. In his fifth year of judicial

service, the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Legal

Advisor-cum-Under Secretary to the Government of

Maharashtra, Law and Judiciary Department on 12^th

December, 1994. Having continued on such post for over

seven and a half years, the petitioner had applied for and

was selected for appointment as President of the Consumer

Disputes Redressal Forum (hereafter “the District

Forum”). Consequent to issuance of Government

Resolution dated 13^th May, 2002, by which the petitioner

was appointed as President of the District Forum, he had by

his letter dated 5^th June, 2002 requested the Principal

Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Law and

Judiciary Department to relieve him from service retaining

his lien on the post of Assistant Legal Advisor. By an order

dated 31^st July, 2002, the petitioner was relieved from the

4

wp2413.17.odt

post of Assistant Legal Advisor without anything being said

in respect of retention/suspension/termination of lien.

Consequent to such relieving order, the petitioner joined as

President of the District Forum on 1^st August, 2002. The

Government Resolution dated 13^th May, 2002, inter alia,

stipulated that the petitioner shall be on probation for a

year and upon confirmation, shall continue as such

President for a further period of four years or until he

attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. The

petitioner continued successfully as President of the District

Forum for the first term, which ended on 31^st July, 2007.

This is evident from the fact that he was offered

appointment for a second term, which he accepted without

demur. The appointment order dated 2^nd July, 2007

stipulated that the petitioner shall continue on the post of

President of the District Forum for a period of five years or

until he attains 65 years of age, whichever is earlier, and in

furtherance thereof he discharged the duty of President of

the District Forum till 31^st October, 2012, i.e., the last day of

the month in which he attained the age of 60 years. If

indeed the petitioner had continued in Judicial Service, he

5

wp2413.17.od