Dismissed

Ram Gopal Kadam v. State of Maharashtra

Bombay HC9 Dec 2022IA/1336/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Single judge dismissed the writ petition filed by a senior citizen challenging the release of retirement benefits of his deceased wife, holding that the High Court has no jurisdiction under L. Chandra Kumar and granting liberty to approach the Administrative Tribunal.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed with liberty to approach the Administrative Tribunal; interim application disposed of.

Ram Gopal Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

6-WP.787..2021

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO. 787 OF 2021 WITH INTERIM APPLICATIION NO. 1336 OF 2022

¶4

Ram Gopal Kadam Versus	} Petitioner
State of Maharashtra	}
and Ors.	} Respondents

¶5

Mr. M. S. Adenwala for the petitioner.

¶6

Mr. Kedar Dighe, AGP for respondents (State).

¶7

CORAM: DIPANKAR DATTA, CJ. & ABHAY AHUJA, J.

¶8

DATE: DECEMBER 9, 2022

¶9

P.C.:

¶10

1. We have given sufficient opportunity to Mr. Adenwala, learned advocate for the petitioner to persuade us hold that the writ petition at this stage is maintainable before this Court. According to him, the petitioner is a senior citizen and, therefore, he should not be driven to file an application before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (hereafter “the Tribunal”, for short) in respect of release of retiral benefits of his deceased wife, a former Government employee. Reliance has been placed on the decision in Haryana Financial Corporation and Anr. vs. M/s. Jagdamba Oil Mills and Anr. , reported in (2002) 3 SCC 496, to impress upon us that the dicta in L. Chandra Kumar vs. Union of India and Ors. , reported in (1997) 3 SCC 261, should not be read as a statute.

¶11

Page 1 of 2

¶12

J.V.Salunke,PS

¶13

6-WP.787..2021

¶14

2. We are afraid, the contentions of Mr. Adenwala are not acceptable. In paragraph 93 of the decision in L Chandra Kumar (supra), the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that only in cases where vires of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 is questioned, the Tribunals may not be approached. In all other cases, where the subject matter is covered by the provisions of section 14 or section 15, as the case may be, read with section 3(q) of the said Act, the remedy provided by section 19 thereof is to be pursued. That is the law of the land and has to be respected, no matter whether one reads it as a statute or not. 3. The writ petition stands dismissed by granting liberty to the petitioner to move the Tribunal in accordance with law. No costs.

¶15

4. In the light of dismissal of the writ petition, the interim application does not survive and stands disposed of accordingly.

¶16

5. All contentions on merits are kept open.

¶17

(ABHAY AHUJA, J.) (CHIEF JUSTICE)

¶18

Digitally signed by PRAVIN PRAVIN DASHARATH DASHARATH PANDIT PANDIT Date: 2022.12.09 21:55:07 +0530

¶19

Page 2 of 2

¶20

J.V.Salunke,PS

Ram Gopal Kadam v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ram Gopal Kadam v. State of Maharashtra

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sanjaykumar Vishnupant Vaidya Vs the Municipal Corporation of City of Thane through Its Municipal Commissioner and Anr.

Central Institute of Fisheries Education Vs Union of India , Ministry of Labour and Employment and Ors.

M/S. Teleperformance Global Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs Employees Provident Fund Organisation and Ors.

The National High Speed Rail Corporation Ltd. Vs State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and 2 Ors.

Ramesh Sridam Renke Vs Municipal Corp. of Gr. Mumbai and 2 Ors.

Ram Gopal Kadam Vs State of Maharashtra