Disposed

Nalini Ramdas Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Bombay HC11 Mar 2019WP/1738/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner, a senior citizen teacher in a Zilla Parishad school, sought directions for the Scrutiny Committee to decide her tribe claim promptly. The High Court observed bureaucratic delays and lack of file traceability, and directed the Committee to decide the claim as early as possible before disposing the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 2, Committee, to take appropriate steps for decision of the claim as early as possible.

Nalini Ramdas Thakur Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2019)

¶1

{1}

¶2

wo1738.19.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO. 1738 OF 2019

¶5

Nalini d/o Ramdas Thakur

¶6

Petitioner

¶7

Versus

¶8

The State of Maharashtra & another

¶9

Respondents

¶10

Mr. A.H. Koralkar, advocate for petitioner. Mrs. M.A. Deshpande, AGP for both the respondents.

¶11

CORAM : PRASANNA B. VARALE AND NITIN W. SAMBRE, JJ. DATE : 11^th March, 2019.

¶12

P.C. :

¶13

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner.

¶14

As limited grievance is raised in the petition and consequently, the prayer also being limited one, namely directions to the Committee to decide the claim, the petition is taken up for final disposal at admission stage.

¶15

Issue notice to respondents returnable forthwith. Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of both the respondents. By consent, matter is taken up for final disposal at this stage.

¶16

Petitioner was appointed as teacher in a school of Zilla Parishad and the tribe claim was forwarded for verification to the Scrutiny Committee at Nasik. Perusal of Exhibit B shows that

¶17

{2}

¶18

wo1738.19.odt

¶19

certain steps were also initiated in the form of seeking vigilance report in the enquiry. Same was submitted before the Scrutiny Committee at Nandurbar. Perusal of documents placed on record at Exhibit C show that a request was made to provide necessary information to take decision at the earliest. On 31.01.2019, in response to a communication, it is informed to the petitioner that the file is not tracable but steps are taken for tracing out the file and, as soon as the file is traced out, necessary steps for verification would be taken. Copy of communication dated 31.01.2019 is placed before us for perusal. Same is taken on record and marked 'X' for identification.

¶20

In view of this fact and also in view of the fact that the petitioner is a senior citizen, we direct respondent no. 2 - Committee to take appropriate steps for decision of the claim, as early as possible. Writ petition stands disposed of.

¶21

NITIN W. SAMBRE JUDGE

¶22

PRASANNA B. VARALE JUDGE

¶23

dyb

Nalini Ramdas Thakur v. the State of Maharashtra and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Nalini Ramdas Thakur 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

Mahadev Laxman Mahandule Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Yogesh Gangadharrao Khanke Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Uddhav Nivrutti Ingale Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others