Allowed

Ramamani B Keshvan v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC6 Oct 2016WP/4860/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single judge's immediate disposal awarded interest on arrears of increments for a retired employee. The court held the claim justified under previous precedents, directing respondents to pay interest from the date of entitlement until actual payment.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner awarded interest on amount of increments from date of entitlement i.e. 1.2.1994 till 31.3.2009 i.e. the date of actual payment, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 4 months from

Ramamani B Keshvan Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2016)

¶1

931 sr. no..odt

¶2

{1}

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

931 WRIT PETITION NO. 4860 OF 2016

¶5

RAMAMANI B KESHVAN VERSUS

¶6

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶7

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Ameya N Sabnis AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 3 : Mr. P.S. Patil Advocate for respondent No.4 : Mr. V.P. Latange.

¶8

. . .

¶9

CORAM : R.M. BORDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.

¶10

DATE : 6TH OCTOBER, 2016.

¶11

PER COURT:

¶12

1] Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel appearing for the respective parties, taken up for final disposal.

¶13

2] The petitioner who is a retired employee of respondent No.5 institution, is claiming payment of arrears of increments alongwith interest on the same till the date of payment.

¶14

3] The issue raised in the matter is no longer res-integra in view of the judgment delivered by the Division Bench of this Court in the matter of Dr. Sudhakar Govindrao Pohnerkar and others Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ( W.P. No. 6970 of 2007 decided on 11.8.2011) and in the matter of Dr. Ramesh Vitthal Rachnapurkar Vs. State of Maharashtra and others ( W.P. No. 2463 of 2013 decided on 24.6.2013). The petitioner's claim towards amount of arrears of increments is justified since the principle amount has been paid to him on 31.3.2009, however, the amount of interest on said

¶15

931 sr. no..odt

¶16

{2}

¶17

amount has not been paid to the petitioner.

¶18

4] For the reasons recorded in the judgment referred to above, the claim of the petitioner lodged in the instant petition deserves to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed.

¶19

4] Respndents are directed to pay interest on the amount of increments from the date of entitlement i.e. 1.2.1994 till 31.3.2009 i.e. the date of actual payment, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within 4 months from today.

¶20

5] Rule is accordingly made absolute with no orders as to costs.

¶21

[K.K.SONAWANE] [R.M. BORDE] JUDGE JUDGE

¶22

grt/-

Ramamani B Keshvan v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramamani B Keshvan 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir Jagannath Mahajan Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shaikh Kasam Hasan and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bazm E Adab Educational Society Thr Its Secretary Dist Jalgaon and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another

Madhyamam Relief Fund Trust Kerala through Its President v K Hamza Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Vaishnavi Nitin Dangat through Its Father Nitin Bhausaheb Dangat Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Minabai Bajirao Sapate and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others