Dismissed

Th State of Maharashtra, through Additional Chief Secretary, Home Dept and Anr. v. Shri. Omprakash B. Jedia

Bombay HC30 Jul 2014WP/1637/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court dismissed a writ petition by the State challenging an M.A.T. order that granted a retired Police ACP exemption from Marathi language examination and directed release of pensionary benefits, finding the petition devoid of merit.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with no order as to costs; M.A.T. order upholding exemption granted to respondent.

Th State of Maharashtra, through Additional… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

WPNo.16372014

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1637 OF 2014

¶4

The State of Maharashtra Through the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai.

¶5

The Commissioner of Police, Crawford Market, Mumbai.

¶6

... Petitioners

¶7

V/s.

¶8

Shri.Omprakash B. Jedia, Aged Adult, Retired ACP R/o. Kunar Apartment C.H.S. Flat No. 201, Bhandup Gaon Bhandup (East), Mumbai.

¶9

... Respondent

¶10

Mr.P.G.Sawant 'B' Panel A.G.P. for the Petitioners/State. Mr.Sandeep Dere, Advocate for the Respondent.

¶11

CORAM :NARESH H.PATIL & RAVINDRA V.GHUGE, JJ. Dated : 30TH JULY 2014

¶12

ORDER: (Per Ravindra V. Ghuge J.)

¶13

We have heard the learned A.G.P. on behalf of the State and Shri.Sandeep Dere-the learned advocate on behalf of the respondent and have gone through the petition paper book with their assistance.

¶14

The petitioner was appointed as a Police Sub Inspector (PSI) in the year 1978. He was promoted as a Police Inspector in May, 1984, as

1/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

a Senior Police Inspector in the year 1994 and as an Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) in the month of October, 1999. He retired from police service on attaining the age of superannuation on 31/05/2008.

¶19

By an order dated 04/05/2007 issued by Petitioner No.2Commissioner of Police, Mumbai, the increments granted to the respondent from the year 1991 were cancelled, after having put in 29 years in employment and one year prior to his retirement, on the ground that he had not passed Marathi examination within time as per the rules. The increments granted to him after 30/12/1989 and 30/12/1991 were held not admissible and he was ordered to refund an amount of Rs. 5,27,190/- only by an order dated 08/10/2007. The respondent was required to file four Original Applications before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (“M.A.T.” in short).

¶20

First Original Application No. 21 of 2008.

¶21

The petitioner preferred his first Original Application before the M.A.T. challenging the orders dated 04/05/2007 and 08/10/2007 issued by the petitioners. It was contended that he was issued with a certificate by the Head of the Department under Rule 3(c) of the Maharashtra Government Servant (Other than High Court Servant) Marathi Language Examination Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the “1987 Rules”). By the said certificate his ability to communicate and enter into correspondence in Marathi language was accepted. He had also passed the Lower Standard and Higher Standard Marathi Language examination

2/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

in the year 2005-06.

By judgment dated 03/03/2008, the said Original Application was allowed. Impugned order dated 08/10/2007 was quashed and set aside. The impugned order dated 04/05/2007 regarding cancellation of pay increments was not interfered with. By an order dated 20/09/2004 passed by M.A.T. the Review Application No. 11 of 2008 was allowed and the above said judgment/order dated 03/03/2008 was recalled. The petitioner was directed to issue a show-cause notice to the Respondent before making any recovery.

¶27

Second Original Application No. 336 of 2010

¶28

The petitioner issued a show-cause notice dated 30/06/2009 to the respondent. After hearing him, the earlier order of cancellation of increments and refund of increments paid was upheld. The respondent preferred the second Original Application which came to be disposed of by the M.A.T. by an order dated 04/03/2011 directing the petitioner to reconsider the case of the respondent in light of the exemption having been granted to similarly situated Officer namely Shri.H.R.Ansari by order dated 21/02/2011.

¶29

The petitioners reconsidered the case of the respondent in light of the directions of the M.A.T. and refused to grant exemption from passing Marathi language examination by it's order dated 19/04/2011. The reasons put forth by the petitioners for denying exemption from passing Marathi language, Lower Standard and High Standard was that the

3/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

respondent did not fulfill the requirement under Rule 4(2)(ii)(b) of the 1987 Rules.

¶34

Third Original Application No. 368 of 2011

¶35

The respondent challenged the impugned order passed by the petitioner dated 19/04/2011 by filing his third Original Application. By judgment and order dated 20/12/2011, the petitioners were directed to reconsider the case of the respondent under Rule 9 of the 1987 Rules within a period of three months.

¶36

Fourth Original Application No. 1045 of 2012

¶37

The petitioners once again rejected the representation of the respondent seeking exemption from passing Marathi Examination by it's order dated 29/05/2012. The respondent challenged the said order by filing his fourth Original Application before the M.A.T. By the impugned judgment and order dated 13/06/2013, the Tribunal was pleased to allow the fourth Original Application of the respondent and directed the petitioners herein to grant exemption to the respondent from passing Marathi language examination and further directed him to release all pensionary benefits payable from the date of his retirement.

¶38

By this petition, the petitioners have called in question the last judgment of the M.A.T. delivered on the fourth Original Application No. 1045 of 2012 filed by the respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that 1987 Rules regarding the earlier Lower and Higher Standard Marathi examination is mandatory. Since the language of the State is

4/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

Marathi, the respondent ought to have sufficient knowledge of Marathi. By passing the concerned examination, the proficiency of the respondent in Marathi language would become a matter of record. No exemption can be granted in such cases. The impugned judgment of M.A.T. suffers from non-application of mind and amounts to adopting a casual view regarding the subject matter. It is, therefore, prayed that the impugned order and judgment of the M.A.T. dated 13/06/2013 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

¶43

The learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent has drawn our attention to the fact that the M.A.T. had observed in it's lengthy judgment that Officers like Shri.Sapankumar Bankimchandra Das, Shri.Manik Shah and Shri.Ansari have been granted exemption under Rule 4(2) and the earlier Rule 4(3) (a) and (c). Only when an applicant does not satisfy the condition in Rule 4(3)(b), he cannot be granted exemption.

¶44

12. Rule 4(2) of the 1987 Rules reads as under :

¶45

“4(2) A Government Servant,

¶46

(i) who claims that his mother tounge is Marathi,

¶47

(ii) who does not claim that his mother tounge is Marathi but that he has studied in Marathi medium and who has not passed Secondary School Certificate or Higher Secondary Examination with Marathi,

¶48

shall fulfill, the following conditions fr getting exemption from these rules :-

¶49

(a) he should be able to write with facile in Devnagiri script;

¶50

(b) he should produce a Certificate from the concerned Institute indicating that he has taken education in Marathi medium at least up to 7^th Standard; and

5/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

In the second Original Application No. 336 of 2010 filed by the respondent, the petitioners had filed their affidavit-in-reply. Paragraph No.3 of the said affidavit is significant which reads as under :

¶56

“Shri Sapankumar Bankimchandra Das, Police Inspector, has been granted exemption from passing the Lower and Higher Marathi Examinations pursuant to the order passed by the Additional Commissioner of Police, Armed Police, Naigum, Mumbai on 30.11.2006. Shri.Sapankumar Bankimchandra Das, Police Inspector was studying in St.Joseph High School, Boys at Khadki, Pune from 26^th June 1961 to 9^th September, 1968. During this period, Marathi was a subject in his school. It is also necessary to know the fact of Deputy Commissioner of Police, has also issued a Certificate dated 8.11.2006 which clearly shows that Shri.Sapankumar Bankimchandra Das, Police Inspector, has knowledge of Marathi very well and he can write, read and speak the Marathi language. Thus he was given exemption from passing said Marathi Language Examination as per the provisions of Section 4(3) of the Maharashtra Government Servants (other than High Court servants) Marathi Language Examination Rules, 1987.”

¶57

The respondent contends that even Mr.M.A.Mirande, ACP was granted exemption by the Joint Commissioner of Police (Admn), Mumbai on 28/05/2014 under Rule 4(3)(a) and (c). Similarly, Shri.P.S.Ganjia, Shri.N.J.Mankshaw and the above referred officers were also granted exemption under the rules.

¶58

The above stated facts were considered by the M.A.T. while delivering the impugned judgment. The respondent further submitted that the respondent had produced a certificate from his Head of Department stating that he can write Marathi language in Devnagari script with speed and the respondent could enter into correspondence in Marathi language. The attention was drawn of the M.A.T. as well as of

6/7

Gaikwad RD

WPNo.16372014

this Court to the judgment of the Tribunal in O.A.No.940 of 1999. In the said case, the applicant had produced a certificate from the Head of the Department. The respondent herein after having produced a similar certificate, had also passed the Lower and Higher Standard examination in 2005 and 2006. It is, therefore, prayed that the petition be dismissed.

¶63

It is a matter of record that the respondent had produced a certificate from the Head of the Department. Several other officers similarly situated were granted exemption under the Rules. The respondent had later on passed the Lower as well as Higher Standard examination in Marathi language in the year 2005 and 2006. The petitioners have woken up from deep slumber for initiating action against the respondent for the first time on 04/05/2007 after the respondent had put in 29 years of service and was left with one year before retirement. Notwithstanding the above, the respondent had cleared both levels of Marathi language Examination prior to the issuance of the first order dated 04/05/2007.

¶64

Taking into account the above stated facts and attending circumstances, we do not find any reason to exercise our writ jurisdiction. The Writ Petition is devoid of merit. Writ petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.

¶65

(RAVINDRA V.GHUGE,J.)

¶66

(NARESH .H.PATIL, J.)

¶67

7/7

¶68

Gaikwad RD

Th State of Maharashtra, through Additional Chief Secretary, Home Dept and Anr. v. Shri. Omprakash B. Jedia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Th State of Maharashtra, through Additional Chief Secretary, Home Dept and Anr. v. Shri. Omprakash B. Jedia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Dept of Agriculture, Animal Husbandry and Ors. Vs Shri. Sagar G. Chikshhe

Vasant K. Thakur and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Smt. Neeta Amit Khardikar Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Chief Secretary, Dept of School Education and Sports and Ors.

Shri. Arun Uttareshwar Barbole Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Mr. Chandrakant Pandurang Jadhav Vs the Union of India, Thorugh Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Dept of Revenue and Ors.

Shri. Arun Uttareshwar Barbole Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.