Allowed

Mangaldas Sukalal Pardhi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School and Education Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC15 Jul 2014WP/6452/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition was disposed of by directing concerned respondents to decide representations made by petitioners within four months, relying on a Government Circular dated 24 April 2007 and previous court orders including those in W.P. no.33 of 2014.

What did the court decide?

Direction to concerned respondents to decide petitioners' representations within four months considering Government Circular dated 24 April 2007.

Mangaldas Sukalal Pardhi and Ors. Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2014)

¶1

66 wp 6452.14 as.doc

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.6452 OF 2014

¶5

Mangaldas s/o Sukalal Pardhi & Ors. ... Petitioners. V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ... Respondents.

¶6

Mr. V.S. Tadke i/b Mr. B.S. Shinde for the Petitioners. Mr. A.I. Patel, AGP for RespondentsState.

¶7

CORAM: ANOOP V. MOHTA & A.A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : JULY 15, 2014.

¶8

P.C. :

¶9

Rule, returnable forthwith.

¶10

2 Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service for

¶11

the respective Respondents.

¶12

3 Learned counsel for the Petitioners has submitted that this

¶13

Court by order dated 6 January 2014 passed in Writ Petition no.33 of 2014 has already directed the concerned Respondent no.3 to decide such representation/s. The same relief can be granted/extended to the Petitioners as they are similarly circumstanced and their grievances are also identical based on the Government Circular dated 24 April 2007. Therefore, we are inclined to dispose of the present Petition on similar

¶14

1/2

¶15

k 66 wp 6452.14 as.doc

¶16

lines. Therefore, service to other Respondents is dispensed with. The Petition is taken up for final disposal forthwith.

¶17

4 Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction to the concerned Respondents to consider the representation/s made by the Petitioners in the light of Government Circular dated 24 April 2007 and order dated 29 October 2013 passed by this Court in Writ Petition no.10200 of 2013 and also in the light of the observations made in judgment dated 24 April 2012 in Writ Petition no.7116 of 2012 passed by this Court at Aurangabad Bench, as referred in the orders of this Court. Similar order was passed in Writ Petition no.2077 of 2013 on 3 July 2013 also.

¶18

5 The representation/s should be decided as early as possible and preferably within a period of four months from today.

¶19

6 Rule is made absolute in the above terms. There shall be

¶20

no order as to costs.

¶21

(A.A. SAYED, J.) (ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.)

¶22

katkam

¶23

2/2

Mangaldas Sukalal Pardhi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School and Education Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mangaldas Sukalal Pardhi and Ors. v. the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, School and Education Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

G. H. Raisoni Educational and Medical Foundation and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Kumar Shubham Bhaskar Annapure, through Father, Shri. Bhaskar Gangaram Annapure Vs Indian Institute of Technology Bombbay, Powai and Ors.

Krushi Jivan Vikas Prathistan, through Chairman, Mr. Babasaheb Sonbaji Wasade and Anr. Vs Directorate of Technical Education, Maharashtra State and Ors.

Namdev Bhagwat Sarkunde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Rural Development and Water Conservation Dept and Ors.

Wahida Ganim Jamdar Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Womens College of Pharmacy, by Shri. Balasaheb Mane Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, through Secretary Vs Directorate of Technical Education, Maharashtra State and Ors.