Allowed

Durgadas S/O Jeevanlal Ragde v. Municipal Council, Tumsar through Chief Officer

Bombay HC24 Feb 2018WP/4655/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge disposed of the writ petition hearing after the petitioner's retirement. The court directed the Municipal Council to pay retiral benefits and arrears as per VIth pay commission recommendations, and permitted the withdrawal of deposited funds within stipulated timeframes.

What did the court decide?

Payment of retiral benefits and VIth Pay Commission arrears within 6 months; payment of Rs. 2 lakhs within 45 days; permission to withdraw deposited Rs. 2 lakhs.

Durgadas S/O Jeevanlal Ragde Vs Municipal… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

WP4655-17

¶2

¶3

FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET No . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 4655/2017

¶5

(DURGADAS JEEVANLAL RAGDE VERSUS MUNICIPAL COUNCIL, TUMSAR)

¶6

¶7

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶8

- - - - Shri P.V. Thakre, counsel for the petitioner. Shri M.I. Dhatrak, counsel for the respondent.

¶9

CORAM : SMT. VASANTI A NAIK AND A.D. UPADHYE, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 24, 2018.

¶10

Since in similar matters we have directed the Municipal Council to pay the retiral benefits to the employees within six months in installments or in lump sum, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties we dispose of the writ petition on the following terms:-

¶11

I) The respondent-Municipal Council would pay the retiral benefits to the petitioner except the arrears of difference of salary as per the recommendations of the VI^th pay commission within six months either in lump sum or in installments.

¶12

II) If the respondent-Municipal Council decides to pay the arrears of salary as per the recommendations of the VI^th pay commission to the other employees of the municipal council for the period from 2006 to 2009, the Municipal Council would pay the arrears to the petitioner at the same time.

¶13

III) The petitioner is permitted to withdraw the sum of Rupees Two Lakhs deposited by the Municipal Council in this Court.

¶14

IV) Since the petitioner has retired on 31.07.2016, the Municipal Council would pay a sum of Rupees Two Lakhs to the petitioner within 45 days.

¶15

WP4655-17

¶16

¶17

V) No order as to costs.

¶18

JUDGE JUDGE

¶19

APTE

Durgadas S/O Jeevanlal Ragde v. Municipal Council, Tumsar through Chief Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Durgadas S/O Jeevanlal Ragde v. Municipal Council, Tumsar through Chief Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kunal @ Golu Anil Jaiswal Vs the Divisional Commissioner Nagpur Division and Another

Rajendra S/O Shankarrao Thombare Vs State of Mah. through Sub Divisional Magistrate, Wardha and 2 Others

National Insurance Co. Ltd. Thr. Divisional Manager Kolkata Thr. Nagpur Branch Vs Grace @ Ezhilarasi W/O Late Pankaj Kapoor and Others

Atiq Rizwan Ahmed S/O.Shafiq Ahmed, and Another Vs Mrs. Asna Parveen W/O. Sameel Asif Khan, Nee Daughter of Mohammed Aslam Sheikh

Shivchand Somaji Khandake and Another Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Ministry of Home, Mantralaya Mumbai and Others

Mr. Mohammad Jawed S/O Shaikh Idu Vs Ahebab Education Society, through Its President, Yavatmal and 3 Others