Disposed

Sitaram Dattatraya Wani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC18 Aug 2017WP/2480/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed the Education Officer and Treasury Officer to decide the petitioner's pension claim afresh, considering the Government Resolution dated 5 May 2009 and Hakim Committee report, uninfluenced by prior orders.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Education Officer and District Treasury Officer to decide the petitioner's claim afresh within eight weeks after receiving a detailed representation.

Sitaram Dattatraya Wani Vs the State of Maharashtra… — Education and Admissions | Bombay HC (2017)

¶1

wp2480.17

¶2

(1)

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.2480 OF 2017

¶5

Sitaram Dattatraya Wani, Age : 61 years, Occ. Retired Teacher, R/o At post Daulawadgaon, Tq. Ashti, Dist. Beed ..PETITIONER

¶6

	VERSUS
1.	The State of Maharashtra, Through its Secretary, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32
2.	The Sr. Accounts Officer, office of the Accountant General, (A & E)-II, Maharashtra, Nagpur
3.	The District Treasury Officer, Beed
4.	The Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla Parishad, Beed	..RESPONDENTS

¶7

Mr T.M. Tandale, Advocate for petitioner; Mrs M.A. Deshpande, A.G.P. for respondents no.1, 3 & 4

¶8

CORAM : SHANTANU S. KEMKAR & NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ.

¶9

DATE : 18^th August, 2017

¶10

P.C.

¶11

Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 19^th December, 2016 (Exh.F) as also the order dated 4^th January, 2017 (Exh.G) passed by the Education Officer and Treasury Officer respectively, the petitioner has filed this petition.

¶12

wp2480.17

¶13

(2)

¶14

According to the petitioner, while deciding his representation the Education Officer has not taken into consideration the Government Resolution dated 5^th May, 2009 (Exh.C) and the calculation as per the example given in the said Government Resolution. According to the petitioner, the decision on the representation was required to be taken by the said authorities keeping in view the said Government Resolution dated 5^th May, 2009 (Exh.C) and Hakim Committee's report.

¶15

Having considered submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.G.P., we are of the view that this petition requires to be disposed of by directing the Education Officer and the Treasury Officer to decide the petitioner's claim afresh.

¶16

The petitioner is given liberty to submit a detailed representation with supporting documents before the said authorities within four weeks from today. On receipt of the same, the said authorities shall re-consider the petitioner's claim and take a fresh decision on it uninfluenced by the orders (Exh.F) and (Exh.G).

¶17

The decision as aforesaid be taken by the Education Officer and the District Treasury Officer within eight weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

¶18

With the aforesaid directions, the petition stands disposed of.

¶19

(NITIN W. SAMBRE, J.) (SHANTANU S. KEMKAR, J.)

¶20

amj

Sitaram Dattatraya Wani v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sitaram Dattatraya Wani 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

Vishal Vikram Itape Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Kishor Tukaram Talale and Another Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Pravin Vaijenath Dhumak Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhima Venkappa Chavan Died Lrs Sulochana Bhimrao Chavan and Others Vs Sanjay Chahande and Others

Amit Marotrao Deshmukh Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Shri Chintamani Parshwanath Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd. through Its Chairman J S Thole Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another