Petitioner, a retired technician, filed a writ petition claiming he was wrongly not promoted and sought retrieval of benefits. The High Court dismissed the petition, finding no error in the Tribunal's earlier dismissal.
Petitioner's claim for promotion and retirement benefits was rejected.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
wp.6832-2013
Dond
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.6832 OF 2013
Shri Shrawan Ganpat Sarode Vs.
Union of India & Ors.
..Petitioner.
..Respondents.
Mr. Vindu P. Pandey for Petitioner.
CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL &
A.S. GADKARI, JJ.
DATE : 6th January 2015. P.C.
1 The Petitioner retired in the year 2004 as a Technician. The
grievance is that, he ought to have been promoted as a MCM and accordingly retiral benefits be disbursed to him.
2 The Petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No.449 of 2012. The said Application came to be dismissed by the Tribunal on 27th August 2012.
3 The learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that
the Petitioner was denied in respect of promotion which has caused
2
wp.6832-2013
prejudice to the Petitioner. He submitted that the Petitioner could not collect information for raising grievance before the appropriate forum in time by adopting petition. He submits that other persons were promoted.
4 In the facts of the case, we find that the Petitioner had approached the Tribunal at belated stage for putting his grievance regarding the issue raised by him before the Trial Court. The Petitioner admittedly retired in the year 2004. The Petitioner claims that he ought to have been promoted as MCM and accordingly claims retiral benefits. However, in the facts of the case, we are not inclined to accept the contention raised by the Petitioner. We do not find any error in the view taken by the Trial Court.
5 Writ Petition is dismissed.
(A.S. GADKARI, J.) (NARESH H. PATIL, J.)
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a retired employee can be promoted and claim retrospective retirement benefits after the date of retirement.
Shri Shrawan Ganpat Sarode
Union of India
NARESH H. PATIL
A.S. GADKARI
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
