The High Court dismissed the writ petition against the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's order condoning technical service breaks for increments and leave, finding the view rational and devoid of inconsistency.
Writ petition dismissed; Tribunal's order upheld.
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}
wp1161115.odt
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO.11611 OF 2015
The State of Maharashtra & others
Petitioners
Versus
Dr.Mrs.Syed Nazia Syed Hasham
Respondent
Mrs.A.V.Gondhalekar, A.G.P. for petitioners.
CORAM : R.M.BORDE &
P.R.BORA, JJ. DATE : 23rd March, 2016
PER COURT:
1 The State is objecting to the order dated 10th December, 2014, passed by Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, allowing group of Original Applications - presented by Respondent-employee & others, condoning technical breaks in service only for the limited purpose of claiming increments and earned leave.
2 On perusal of the order, it does appear that the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal has adopted similar view in O.A. No.531/2013 and other companion matters, which order, has attained finality. The technical break is condoned only for the purposes of claiming increments and earned leave and not for the purposes of claiming seniority. We do not find anything inconsistent or irrational in the view adopted by the MAT. Writ Petition is devoid of substance.
Hence stands dismissed.
P.R.BORA
JUDGE
R.M.BORDE
JUDGE
adb/wp1161115
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal's order condoning service breaks only for claiming increments and earned leave.
The State of Maharashtra & others
Dr. Mrs. Syed Nazia Syed Hasham
P.R. Bora
R.M. Borde
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
