Allowed

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke v. State of Maharshtra Its Secretary Dept. of School Education Mumbai and 3 Others

Bombay HC24 Mar 2015WP/1765/2014

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the petitioner's writ petition seeking direction for pay fixation. The court directed the respondents to revise the pay-scale and pay arrears within 12 weeks following the dismissal of a pending review petition.

What did the court decide?

Direction to grant revised pay-scale and pay arrears within 12 weeks; respondent no.4 to submit bills within two weeks.

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke Vs State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2015)

¶1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶3

Writ Petition No.1765/2014

¶4

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke Vs. State of Maharashtra and others.

¶5

Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's or directions and Registrar's orders. Orders.

¶6

Shri Sachin Khandekar, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri N.S. Khubalkar, AGP for the respondent nos.1 to 3.

¶7

C ORAM : SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & A.M. BADAR , JJ.

¶8

DATED : MARCH 24, 2015.

¶9

Heard.

¶10

By this petition, the petitioner seeks a direction to the respondents to process the claim of the petitioner for pay fixation, as per the judgment dated 28.4.2011 in Writ Petition No.177/2011.

¶11

It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that the issue involved in this case stands answered in favour of the petitioner by the judgment dated 28.4.2011 in a bunch of the Writ Petitions bearing Writ Petition No.177/2011 and others. It is stated that by allowing those petitions, this Court had directed the revision of pay-scale of the petitioners therein in accordance with the Rules of 1988 with consequential benefits.

¶12

¶13

Till the previous date of hearing, a submission

¶14

was made on behalf of the State Government by the learned Assistant Government Pleader that though the Special Leave Petition filed against the aforesaid judgment of this Court was dismissed, a Review Petition is pending before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and hence this Court had adjourned the matter. It is, however, pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Review Petition is also dismissed on 26^th February, 2015 and it would now be necessary for the State Government to immediately revise the pay-scale of the petitioner and pay the arrears.

¶15

For the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 28.4.2011 in Writ Petition No.177/2011 and others, we allow this writ petition. The respondents are directed to grant revised pay-scale to the petitioner in accordance with the Rules of 1988 with consequential benefits. The said revision and payment of arrears should be given to the petitioner, as early as possible, and positively within a period of 12 weeks.

¶16

It is stated on behalf of the petitioner that the respondent-Management has already sent the bills as per the revised pay scale to the State Government. If the said

¶17

¶18

bills are not submitted to the Government as yet, we direct the respondent no.4 to send the relevant salary bills for the revised pay-scale to the Education Officer within a period of two weeks, from the date of receipt of the order. Order accordingly. No costs.

¶19

JUDGE

¶20

JUDGE

¶21

Ambulkar

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke v. State of Maharshtra Its Secretary Dept. of School Education Mumbai and 3 Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Prabhakar Rambhauji Radke v. State of Maharshtra Its Secretary Dept. of School Education Mumbai and 3 Others

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

Milind S/O Shankarrao Nichal and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, Department of Rural Development, Mumbai and Others

Shri Vinod S/O Wasudeo Shewatkar Vs Chief Engineer (Tech.) Maharashtra State Electricity Generation Co. Ltd., Mumbai and Anothers

Shri Ravikumar S/O Hiraman Kawale Vs the Directorate, Municipal Administration, Mumbai through Its and Director and 2 Others

Shri Ratan S/O Shankar Singh Nathe Vs Schedule Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati through Its Asst. Commissioner and 2 Others

Shri Chintaman S/O Pralhad Tayade Vs State of Maharashtra, General Administration Department, Mumbai through Its Secretary and 2 Others

Mr. Virendra Shankarrao Chopde Vs Director, Social Welfare Directorate, State of Maharashtra, Pune and 4 Others