Dismissed

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Vijay Thansing Chavan

Bombay HC29 Aug 2018WP/3236/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition challenging the discharge of a person appointed on compassionate grounds who was allegedly terminated for failing to pass a typing exam. The court found the respondent had passed the exam within the rules", concluding no error was committed by the Tribunal in reinstating the respondent.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition was dismissed, affirming the Tribunal's order reinstating the respondent.

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs Vijay… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(1) 211-wp-3236-2008

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 211 WRIT PETITION NO. 3236 OF 2008

¶3

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS

¶4

..PETITIONERS

¶5

VERSUS

¶6

VIJAY THANSING CHAVAN ..RESPONDENT

¶7

Mr. S. K. Tambe, A.G.P for the Petitioners-State.

¶8

… CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & S. M. GAVHANE, JJ. DATED : 29^th AUGUST, 2018.

¶9

PER COURT:-

¶10

1.Mr. Tambe, learned A.G.P for the
petitioners submits that the respondent herein was
appointed as a clerk on compassionate ground under
the appointment order dated 31.12.2003 as per the
Government Resolution dated 23.08.1996. The
respondent was required to pass requisite English
and Marathi Typing Examination within two years
from the date of his appointment. As he did not
pass the said examination within stipulated period
as per the Government Resolution dated 23.08.1996
and the condition in the appointment order dated
31.12.2003, the petitioner was rightly terminated.
The Tribunal has erroneously relied on the
Government Resolution dated 08.09.1997. The same
would not have applicability to the present case,
the same is applicable to the post of peon.

¶11

2.We have considered the submissions and we
have also gone through the judgment of the

¶12

(2)

¶13

211-wp-3236-2008

¶14

Tribunal.

¶15

3.It is matter of record that respondent was
appointed as clerk on compassionate ground under
the appointment order dated 31.12.2003. It is also
not disputed that the respondent has passed the
said typing examination in May 2006 and he has
produced the certificate to that effect. The
Tribunal has considered the Government Resolution
dated 08.09.1997. The Tribunal has also considered
the Rules that is Maharashtra Civil Services
(Compulsory) Marathi Shorthand and Marathi Typing
Examination for English Stenographer and English
Typist Rules 1991. The said rules prescribe
passing the typing examination within four years
from the date of joining the service. In the
present case the petitioner has passed the said
examination within two and half years of joining
the service. The respondent was directed to be
reinstated. This Court had not stayed the order.

¶16

4.Considering all the aforesaid aspects of
the matter, no error has been committed by the
Tribunal in passing the impugned order.

¶17

5.Writ Petition is disposed of. Rule
discharged. No costs.

¶18

(S. M. GAVHANE) (S. V. GANGAPURWALA)
 JUDGE JUDGE

¶19

Devendra/August-18

¶20

Devendra Digitally signed byDevendra Nandkumar Nandkumar Kale Kale Date: 2018.08.3111:28:38 +0530

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Vijay Thansing Chavan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The State of Maharashtra and Ors. v. Vijay Thansing Chavan

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

Hanuman Savalhari Sarode Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Prashant Dagdu Warkari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhukar Daulatrao Wavale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Rameshwar Namdeo Dahate Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.

Liyakatbee Shaikh Abdul Jabbar Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bhausaheb Ramdas Kakde and Ors. Vs the State of Maharashtra and Ors.