Allowed

Bharat Dhansing Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC28 Jan 2020WP/1726/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Judicature at Bombay Bench at Aurangabad disposed of multiple connected writ petitions by following the orders previously passed in Writ Petitions 2344 and 2345 of 2019, directing respondents to refund excess deducted gratuity with interest.

What did the court decide?

Respondents to refund excess gratuity with interest at 10% p.a. within six months.

Bharat Dhansing Jadhav Vs the State of… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

¶2

11wp1726o20group

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.1726 OF 2020

¶5

WITH WP/1727/2020 WITH WP/1728/2020 WITH WP/1729/2020 WITH WP/1730/2020 WITH WP/1731/2020 WITH WP/1732/2020 WITH WP/1733/2020 WITH WP/1734/2020 WITH WP/1735/2020 WITH WP/1736/2020 WITH WP/1771/2020 WITH WP/1772/2020 WITH WP/1773/2020 WITH WP/1774/2020

¶6

BHARAT DHANSING JADHAV

¶7

VERSUS

¶8

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

¶9

Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri Patil Prafullasing H. AGP for the Respondents/ State : Shri P.G.Borade

¶10

CORAM : S.V. GANGAPURWALA

¶11

¶12

SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, JJ.

¶13

DATE :- 28^th January, 2020

¶14

Per Court :-

¶15

1 We have heard learned advocate for the petitioners and the

¶16

learned AGP.

¶17

2 The objection of the learned AGP of alternate remedy was considered by this Court while delivering the judgment in Writ Petition No.2344/2019 dated 19.03.2019.

¶18

3 On merits, it is accepted by the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned AGP that the petitioners stand on the same premise as the petitioners in Writ Petition No.2344/2019 and Writ Petition No. 10752/2019 with connected writ petitions.

¶19

2 11wp1726o20group

¶20

4 In the light of that and for the reasons recorded in the

¶21

judgment in Writ Petition No.2344/2019 and Writ Petition No.2345/2019 dated 19.03.2019, we follow the same course.

¶22

5 In the judgment referred to above, the Division Bench of this Court had allowed the writ petitions and directed to refund the amount alongwith the interest at the rate of 10% per annum. The Division bench of this Court in the said writ petitions passed the following order:-

¶23

“In that view of the matter, all these writ petitions stand allowed. The excess amount, which is deducted from the amount of retirement dues payable to the petitioners in the form of gratuity, be refunded to the respective petitioners along with interest @ 10% p.a. from the date the amount was recovered. The said refund be made within a period of six months.”

¶24

6 In the light of above, the present Writ Petitions are also disposed of in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition Nos.2344 and 2345/2019 dated 19.03.2019.

¶25

7 The respondents shall refund to the respective petitioners the excess amount deducted from the amount of gratuity/salary along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date the amount was recovered. The payment shall be made within a period of SIX MONTHS. 8 These Writ petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. No costs.

¶26

kps

¶27

(SHRIKANT D. KULKARNI, J.) (S.V. GANGAPURWALA, J. )

Bharat Dhansing Jadhav v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Bharat Dhansing Jadhav 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

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Harish Thakardas Rizwani Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Mandal through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Akhil Maharashtra Gramin Shikshan Vikas Mandal Aurangabad through Its President Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

Narendra Arjun Mahire Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others

M/S Nagina Herbal through Its Proprietor Syed Naimuddin Ahteshamuddin Vs the Nashik Merchant Co. Operative Bank Ltd. and Others

Suraj Girdharsing Rajput Vs Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation Mumbai and Others