Dismissed

Hanuman Savalhari Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC28 Aug 2018WP/5572/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ applicant sought renumeration and regularization of service as a Kotwal following his father's retirement. The High Court, observing the absence of a valid appointment order by a competent authority, held that the Tribunal was correct in dismissing the original application and dismissed the present petition.

What did the court decide?

No costs awarded; original application dismissal affirmed.

Hanuman Savalhari Sarode Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

( 1 )

¶2

wp5572.18

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

 WRIT PETITION NO. 5572 OF 2018

¶5

HANUMAN SAVALHARI SARODE

¶6

VERSUS

¶7

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶8

Mr.Bhagwan V. Thombre, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr.S.B.Joshi, AGP for the respondent/State

¶9

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA &
S.M.GAVHANE,JJ.
DATED :28.08.2018

¶10

P.C. :-

¶11

.The original application filed by the
petitioner seeking renumeration and regularization
in service as Kotwal has been dismissed. Aggrieved
thereby the present petition.

¶12

2.Mr. Thombre, learned counsel appearing for
the petitioner submits that the father of the
petitioner was working as Kotwal of village
Antarwali, Tq. Paithan. He retired on attaining the
age of superannuation on 31.12.1994. The petitioner
is serving as a Kotwal of the said village in place
of his father since 08.08.1995. Learned counsel
submits that for all these years he is directed to
perform the duties as Kotwal but he is not paid

¶13

( 2 ) wp5572.18

¶14

renumeration nor his services are regularized. The
Circle Officer has also submitted the report to
that effect. The tribunal has not considered all
these aspects and has rejected the original
application.

¶15

3.Learned AGP submits that the petitioner at
no point of time was issued with the appointment
order as a Kotwal. The Circle Inspector nor the
Talathi have any powers or authority to direct the
petitioner to function as a Kotwal. As the
petitioner is never appointed as a Kotwal, he is not
entitled for any remuneration or regularization. The
tribunal has rightly considered the said aspect.

¶16

4.We have considered the submissions so also
gone through the order of the tribunal. It is not
disputed that the petitioner has not been issued the
appointment order to function or officiate as a
Kotwal after the superannuation of his father. The
Circle Officer nor the Talathi have powers to direct
the petitioner to work as a Kotwal. In absence of
any appointment order by the competent authority the
question of giving renumeration or regularization of
the service does not arise. No error has been

¶17

( 3 ) wp5572.18 committed by the tribunal. 5. The writ petition stands dismissed. No costs.

¶18

[S.M.GAVHANE,J.] [S.V. GANGAPURWALA,J.]

¶19

VishalK/ wp5572.18

Hanuman Savalhari Sarode v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hanuman Savalhari Sarode 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

Sangita Ramesh Koli @ Sangita Hemendra Sapkale Vs Education Officer (Sec), Zp Jalgaon and Anr.

Shaikh Hameed Shaikh Hyder and Anr. Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

The Commissioner of Income TAX-1, Nashik Vs Ramrao Sitaram Patil (Huf) and (Individual)

Prashant Dagdu Warkari Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Madhukar Daulatrao Wavale Vs the State of Mah and Ors.

Sunita Baban Solse Vs the State of Maharshtra and Others