Disposed

Aruna Arjun Gangavane @ Mrs. Varsha Vasant Maske v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Tribal Development Detp. and Ors.

Bombay HC1 Apr 2022IA/1803/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This Court disposed of an interim application challenging withholding of salary and allowances. The Court directed the respondent to refrain from breach of interim protection granted previously and not to stop salary components payable to the applicant, distinguishing promotional benefits.

What did the court decide?

Directed respondent No.3 to refrain from breach of interim protection and not to stop salary and allowances payable to the petitioner.

Aruna Arjun Gangavane @ Mrs. Varsha Vasant… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2022)

¶1

17-IA-803-2022.doc

¶2

shailaja

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

¶4

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶5

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1803 OF 2022

¶6

IN

¶7

WRIT PETITION NO.5189 OF 2015
Aruna Arujun Gangavane &]
Ms. Varsha Vasant Maske]Petitioner
Vs.
State of Maharashtra through]
Secretary Tribal Development ]
Department and others.]Respondents
…..

¶8

Mr. R.K. Mendadkar a/w Mr. Tanaji Jadhav, for Applicant.
Ms. P.J. Gavhane, A.G.P, for Respondent – State.

¶9

CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND
 G.A. SANAP, JJ.

¶10

 DATE : 1ST APRIL, 2022.

¶11

P.C.

¶12

1. Heard.

¶13

2.This Court vide it’s order dated 24th July, 2017 has granted
interim relief to the petitioner, although, it has been made clear
the petitioner would not be entitled for any promotional benefits
under the Scheduled Tribes category and children of the petitioner
would also not be entitled to avail of such benefits.

¶14

1 of 2

¶15

SHAILAJASHRIKANT Digitally signed by SHAILAJASHRIKANT HALKUDEDate: 2022.04.01 17:59:41 HALKUDE +0530

¶16

17-IA-803-2022.doc

¶17

3. It is clear from this order that service of the petitioner is
duly protected although, she would not be entitled to be promoted
by claiming that she belongs to Schedule Tribe category. Yet, as
submitted by the learned Counsel for the applicant, an attempt is
being made to withhold salary and allowances which are part of
the salary payable to the petitioner from March, 2022. If any such
attempt is being made, it would be in breach of the interim
protection granted to the applicant on 24th July, 2017 and, we,
therefore, direct respondent No.3 to refrain from entering into
breach of the interim protection granted to the applicant on 24th
July, 2017. Respondent No.3 also would not stop salary and
allowances which are part of the salary payable to the petitioner.

¶18

4. Interim Application is disposed of.

¶19

[G.A. SANAP, J.]

¶20

[SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.]

¶21

2 of 2

Aruna Arjun Gangavane @ Mrs. Varsha Vasant Maske v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Tribal Development Detp. and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Aruna Arjun Gangavane @ Mrs. Varsha Vasant Maske v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Tribal Development Detp. and Ors.

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

Gargi Singh Since Minor through Her Father Rakesh Kumar Singh Vs State of Maharashtra and 2 Ors.

Kum. Arya Vaibhav Umbarje Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary Tribal and Anr.

Anurag Ajit Gaikwad Vs State of Maharashtra Thr Secretary Tribal Development Dept. and Ors.

Smt. Shobha Adinath Fuke Vs the State of Maharashtra, Department of Secondary School Education, Thr. Secretary and Ors.

The President Harun Mahamudkha Pathan Vs the Education Officer (Primary) Zilha Parishad, and Ors.

Adivasi Vikas Chaturtha Shreni Rojandari Karmachari Sanghatna, Kalwan, through Kisan S. Mahale Vs State of Maharashtra, through Secretary, Tribal Development Dept and Ors.