Petitioner, a superannuated police constable, challenged recovery of excess pension paid from 2013. Held that remedy lies under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Petition dismissed with liberty to approach Tribunal.
No order as to costs; liberty to approach Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1 WP / 6390 /2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 6390 OF 2020
Suresh Tryambak Takane ... Petitioner
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and another ... Respondents
None present for petitioner
Mr. S.G. Karlekar, AGP for respondent – State
CORAM : DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ AND
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.
DATE : JANUARY 20, 2021
PC :
He seeks to challenge the action of the respondents in recovering alleged excess amount paid to him from 1st January, 2013.
2 WP / 6390 /2020
[RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.] [ CHIEF JUSTICE ]
arp/
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the dispute regarding recovery of excess pension paid to a superannuated police constable falls within the jurisdiction of the High Court or the Administrative Tribunal.
Whether the writ petition challenging the recovery of excess pension should be dismissed.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Suresh Tryambak Takane
The State of Maharashtra
Dipankar Datta
Ravindra V. Ghuge
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
