CASE NO.:

Appeal (civil) 1021 of 2002

PETITIONER:

STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

RESPONDENT:

UTTAM VISHNU PAWAR

DATE OF JUDGMENT: 17/01/2008

BENCH:

A.K. MATHUR & H.S. BEDI

JUDGMENT:

JUDGMENT

ORDER

1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Delay condoned in SLP(C) No. 20630/2006.

3. Leave granted in the special leave petitions.

4. All these appeals involve similar question of law therefore they are

clubbed together and are being disposed of by a common order.

5. The facts given in C.A. No. 1021/2002 (State of Maharashtra & Ors.

Vs.

Uttam Vishnu Pawar) are taken into consideration for disposal of these

appeals.

6. The respondent-Uttam Vishnu Pawar filed Original Application No.

930/1999 before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal Mumbai and

sought a

direction that his services which have been rendered by him in the

earlier

department may be counted for computing the period of 12 years service

for

Time Bound Promotion as per Government Resolution dated 8.6.1995. The

Tribunal vide its order dated 14th March, 2000 allowed the claim of the

respondent and held that the services rendered by the incumbent in the

previous department shall be counted in computing the period of 12 years

for Time Bound Promotion Scheme. Aggrieved against the order passed by

the

Tribunal, the State of Maharashtra-appellant herein filed a writ

petition

before the High Court. The Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay

after

hearing both the parties affirmed the order of the Tribunal dated

14.3.2000.

7. The respondent herein was working as a Telephone Operator in

Irrigation

Department of the State of Maharashtra. Thereafter he made a request for

his transfer from Mumbai Zone to Kolhapur Zone. The request of the

respondent was acceded to and he was transferred on his own request from

Mumbai Zone to Kolhapur Zone and he lost his seniority in Mumbai Zone

and

he joined in Kolhapur Zone on 14.6.1990 as a Junior Clerk at zero

seniority. Thereafter, the State Government passed a Resolution dated

8.6.1995 giving a Time Bound Promotion to the persons who are stagnated

in

the Group C and D cadres for a long period. As per the said Resolution

those persons who have put in 12 years of service and who fulfill other

conditions laid down in the said Resolution were eligible for the next

higher scale of pay. We are not concerned with the other conditions laid

down in the Resolution dated 8.6.1995. We are only concerned with the

limited question that whether the respondent is entitled to count his

service rendered in the Mumbai Zone when he was transferred to Kolhapur

Zone for purposes of computing 12 years of service so as to enable him

to

get the benefit of this Resolution. The Tribunal granted the benefit of

past service to the respondent and the same was affirmed by the Division

Bench of the High Court.

8. Learned counsel for the State of Maharashtra submitted that since the

incumbent was at zero seniority in the Kolhapur Zone therefore his

services

rendered in the Mumbai Zone cannot be counted for computing the period

of

12 years so as to give him the benefit of Time Bound Promotion Scheme as

per Resolution dated 8.6.1995.

9. As against this, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that

the

incumbent has already lost his seniority and as per the transfer order

he

has been placed at the zero seniority level but it does not mean that he

will lose the service put in by him in the Mumbai Zone. Learned counsel

for

the respondent has invited our attention to a series of cases of this

Court

where a view has been taken that if an incumbent is transferred to

another

zone either by way of public interest or on his own request in either

situation the incumbent will get the benefit of past service without

getting any benefit of seniority. In this connection our attention was

invited to the case of Dwijen Chandra Sarkar and Another Vs. Union of

India

And Others (1999) 2 SCC 119. In that case the incumbent was transferred

from Rehabi