Disposed

Mrs. Ashwani Maruti Patil and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra Thruogh the Secretary and Anr.

Bombay HC25 Jan 2016WP/2064/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, an assistant teacher, sought retrospective approval of service from date of joining rather than later approved date. Court directed Education Officer to decide matter after comprehensive representation within two months without expressing opinion on merits.

What did the court decide?

Representation to Education Officer allowed within three weeks; response required within two months. Case disposed of without decision on merits.

Mrs. Ashwani Maruti Patil and Anr. Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

1/2

¶2

wp-2064-15.doc

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2064 OF 2015

¶5

Mrs.Ashwani Maruti Patil ...Petitioner v/s. The State of Maharashtra & ors. ...Respondents

¶6

Mr.U.R.Mankapure for the Petitioner. Mr.P.G.Sawant, AGP for Respondents Nos.1 & 2.

¶7

CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL &

¶8

A.A.SAYED, JJ.

¶9

DATED : 25 JANUARY 2016

¶10

P.C.:

¶11

The Petitioner was appointed on 31 December 2012 as Asst.Teacher. It is stated that he joined the post on 1 January 2013. Thereafter, a proposal was forwarded to Respondent No.2Education Officer (Secondary) Zilla Parishad, Solapur by Respondent No.3 (Exh.B) for getting approval to transfer of the Petitioner from unaided division to aided school. By communication dated 24 February 2014, the Education Officer, Secondary, Zilla Parishad,Solapur accepted the proposal forwarded by Respondent No.3 on a condition that the Petitioner's services would be approved with effect from 15 June 2013 as Shikshan Sevak.

¶12

Learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioner submits that the Petitioner seeks approval from the date of joining of his service i.e. 1 January 2013 instead of 15 June 2013. It is submitted that in case the Education Officer approves the proposal from 1 January 2013, the Petitioner would get

1/2

Uday P. Kambli

2/2

wp-2064-15.doc

seniority benefit in service. Counsel for the Petitioner placed reliance on two orders of this Court, which are annexed to the Petition.

¶18

In the facts & circumstances of the case, we observe that the Petitioner may make comprehensive representation to the Education Officer, Secondary, Zilla Parishad, Solapur within three weeks from today. In case such representation is made, the Education Officer, Secondary shall decide the same within two months thereafter after going through the entire record and orders passed by this Court in other cases. The Education Officer would be entitled to hear the concerned party in person.

¶19

It is clarified that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the claim of the Petitioner.

¶20

5. The Petition is disposed of.

¶21

(A.A. SAYED, J.) ( NARESH H. PATIL J.)

¶22

2/2

¶23

Uday P. Kambli

Mrs. Ashwani Maruti Patil and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra Thruogh the Secretary and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mrs. Ashwani Maruti Patil and Anr. v. the State of Maharashtra Thruogh the Secretary and Anr.

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

Shri. Deepak Gupta S/O. Shri. M.P. Gupta Vs Smt. Sonu Gupta W/O. Shree Deepak Gutpa

Shri. Balasaheb Baburao Jambhulkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Shri. Jeevan Mahadev Argade Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Sau. Rajiya Ajmoddin Tamboli Vs Shri. Rohan Kailas Dorage and Ors.

Mrs. Ashwani Maruti Patil and Anr. Vs the State of Maharashtra Thruogh the Secretary and Anr.

Shri. Balasaheb Baburao Jambhulkar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.