Disposed

Shaikh Mushtaque Ahmed Kasam Qureshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC12 Dec 2018WP/1870/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court directed a municipal corporation with weak finances to pay outstanding retirement benefits (arrears, D.A., leave encashment) to retired employees within six months, while reserving the right regarding pension commutation pending future policy changes.

What did the court decide?

Direction to pay differences in arrears, D.A., and leave encashment within six months; reservation regarding pension commutation.

Shaikh Mushtaque Ahmed Kasam Qureshi Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

910-WP-1870-18.odt

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 1870 OF 2018

¶4

Shaikh Mushtaque Ahmed Kasam Qureshi ..PETITIONER VERSUS

¶5

State of Maharashtra and Another ..RESPONDENTS

¶6

WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 1880 OF 2018

¶7

Prakash Dhannulal Kurliye ..PETITIONER VERSUS

¶8

State of Maharashtra and Another ..RESPONDENTS

¶9

Mr. S.S. Jadhavar, Advocate for petitioners. Mr. S.B. Joshi, A.G.P. for respondent – State. Mr. V.S. Bedre, Advocate for respondent no.2.

¶10

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA AND R.G. AVACHAT, JJ. DATED : 12^th DECEMBER, 2018

¶11

ORDER :

¶12

Mr. Jadhavar, the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have retired on 31^st March, 2017 and 30^th June, 2017 respectively. Except gratuity amount paid to the petitioners after filing of the petitions, the other retiral benefits such as leave encashment benefit, arrears as per 6^th Pay Commission, D.A., benefit of time bound pay and commutation

¶13

of pension have not been paid.

¶14

1 / 3

¶15

910-WP-1870-18.odt

¶16

Mr. Bedre, the learned Counsel Respondent No.2 submits that because of the weak financial condition of the Municipal Corporation, the arrears of 6^th Pay Commission, leave encashment benefit, D.A. and benefit of time bound pay have not been paid to many such employees. A policy decision has been taken in the year 2005 for not paying commutation of pension.

¶17

The Apex Court has time and again held that pension is not bounty but hard earned property of a retiree. The respondents are duty bound to pay the entire retiral benefits at least within six months from the date of retirement.

¶18

Considering the ground of weak financial condition being pleaded by Respondent No.2 – Municipal Corporation, we pass the following order :-

¶19

(I) Respondent No.2 – Municipal Corporation shall pay the petitioners the difference of arrears towards 6^th Pay Commission, D.A., benefit of leave encashment expeditiously within a period of six months from today.

¶20

(II) As and when the Municipal Corporation takes decision to make payment of commutation of pension, such benefit shall also be extended to the petitioners.

¶21

2 / 3

¶22

910-WP-1870-18.odt

¶23

(III) We have considered this request as it is submitted that

¶24

regular pension is being paid properly.

¶25

(IV) With these directions, both the writ petitions are disposed of. No costs.

¶26

( R.G. AVACHAT, J. )

¶27

( S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )

¶28

SSD

¶29

3 / 3

Shaikh Mushtaque Ahmed Kasam Qureshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaikh Mushtaque Ahmed Kasam Qureshi v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

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

Atul Anilrao Patil Vs the State of Maharashtra and Anothers

Kirankumar Uttamrao Metalwad Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Jeevan Vithalrao Hendre Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Sharda Rajendra Aajbe Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhimrao Anandrao Kokule and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Prakash Dhannulal Kurliye Vs the State of Maharashtra and Another