Disposed

Vinayak Vitthal Jadhav and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC3 May 2016WP/1443/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions, the High Court directed the Project Officer to forward a proposal regarding Assured Career Progress Scheme to the Additional Commissioner for consideration within four weeks, specifying a ten-week deadline for the final decision based on service records.

What did the court decide?

Direction to forward proposal within four weeks and decide within ten weeks.

Vinayak Vitthal Jadhav and Another Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

(1)W.P. No. 1443 of 2016

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD.

¶3

Writ Petition No. 1443 of 2016

¶4

District : Hingoli

¶5

1. Vinayak s/o. Vitthal Jadhav, Age : 37 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Jambhrun (Andh), Taluka & District : Hingoli.

¶6

2. Rohini d/o. Rameshrao Kulkarni, Age : 37 years, Occupation : Service, R/o. Shirali, Taluka : Vasmat, District : Hingoli. .. Petitioners. versus

¶7

1. The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Tribal Development Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai - 32.

¶8

2. The Commissioner, Tribal Development, Nashik.

¶9

3. The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Amravati.

¶10

4. The Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Kalamnuri, District : Hingoli. .. Respondents.

¶11

............

¶12

(2)W.P. No. 1443 of 2016

¶13

Mr. V.A. Dhakne, Advocate, for the petitioners.

¶14

Mrs. A.V. Gondhalekar, Asst. Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 4.

¶15

............

¶16

CORAM : S.S. SHINDE &

¶17

SANGITRAO S. PATIL, JJ.

¶18

DATE : 3RD MAY 2016

¶19

PER COURT :

¶20

Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the
petitioners and the learned Asst. Government Pleader
appearing for the respondents.

¶21

2.The learned Counsel for the petitioners
submit that the Headmaster of Sant Namdev Aadivasi
Ashram School, Jambhrun (Andh), Taluka & District :
Hingoli, has submitted proposal to respondent in
respect of Assured Career Progress Scheme on
completion of 12 years' service by the petitioners.
However, respondent nos.3 and 4 have not taken
decision on the said proposal.

¶22

3.We direct respondent no.4 to forward the
aforesaid proposal, after verifying the factual
details about the service rendered by the petitioners
and the relevant policy of the State Government, to
respondent no.3, if already not forwarded, as
expeditiously as possible, however, within four weeks

¶23

(3)W.P. No. 1443 of 2016

¶24

from today. Upon receiving such proposal, respondent
no.3 to consider the said proposal keeping in view
the service record of the petitioners, their
entitlement for the Assured Career Progress Scheme on
completion of 12 years' service, in accordance with
Government policy and after satisfying itself, take
appropriate decision, as expeditiously as possible
and preferably within 10 weeks from receiving such
proposal, in case, same is not already decided.

¶25

4.With the above directions, the Writ Petition
is disposed of.

¶26

5.Parties to act upon an authenticated copy of
this order.

¶27

 puranik / WP1443.16

Vinayak Vitthal Jadhav and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinayak Vitthal Jadhav and Another v. the State of Maharashtra and 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

Baban Appa Kolekar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Raghunath Bhimrao Yelave Vs the State of Mahrashtra and Others

Vrandavani Bhagwan Chaudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shivaji Deorao Suryawanshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Digambar Erappa Manyar Vs the Secretary Rural Development Mantralaya Mumbai and Others

Sonali Kamlakar Meshramkar and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another