Allowed

Smt. Lata Wd/O. Arun Nandanwar v. Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli Thr. Chief Executive Officer and Another

Bombay HC7 Sept 2023WP/3973/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the writ petition of a widow seeking pensionary benefits for her late husband, a primary teacher. The court applied the reasoning from W.P. No.2035 of 2022, directing compliance within three months.

What did the court decide?

Petition allowed for reasons assigned in W.P. No.2035 of 2022; compliance within three months; no order as to costs.

Smt. Lata Wd/O. Arun Nandanwar Vs Zilla… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2023)

¶1

1 WP-3973-2023.odt

¶2

2023:BHC-NAG:13327-DB

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

¶4

Writ Petition No.3973 of 2023

¶5

Smt. Lata wd/o Arun Nandanwar

¶6

Versus

¶7

Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli, through its Chief Executive Officer and another

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram,
appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order
and Registrar's orders.

¶9

Shri P.N. Shende, Counsel for Petitioner.

¶10

Shri A.W. Paunikar, Counsel for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

¶11

CORAM : A. S. CHANDURKAR AND MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ.

¶12

DATE : 7th SEPTEMBER,2023 .

¶13

P. C. :

¶14

1.Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard the learned counsel
appearing for the parties.

¶15

2.The husband of the petitioner was serving as untrained Primary Teacher in
the School run by the Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli. The petitioner-his widow seeks
pensionary benefits in terms of the recommendations of the Seventh Pay
Commission. The learned counsel for the parties do not dispute that the similar
issue has been considered and decided by the Division Bench in Writ Petition
No.2035 of 2022 [Smt. Anjali Wd/o Madhukar Kando and another Versus State
of Maharashtra and another] on 3-4-2023. Since the petitioners are similarly
situated, the present writ petition is allowed for the reasons assigned in the
decision referred to above in terms of the prayer clauses (A) and (B). The
necessary compliance be done within a period of three months from receiving
the copy of this order.

¶16

3. Rule is made absolute in the aforesaid terms with no order as to costs.

¶17

(MRS. VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, J.) (A. S. CHANDURKAR, J.)

¶18

LANJEWAR

Smt. Lata Wd/O. Arun Nandanwar v. Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli Thr. Chief Executive Officer and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Lata Wd/O. Arun Nandanwar v. Zilla Parishad, Gadchiroli Thr. Chief Executive Officer and Another

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

Shri Saibaba Shikshan Sanstha Thr. Secretary, Amravati and Others Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Education, Mumbai and Others

Shri Saibaba Shikshan Sanstha Thr. Secretary Amravati and Others Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Education, Mumbai and Others

Philomina D/O Joseph Pichappilly Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secy., Urban Devp. and 3 Ors.

M/S Komal Stone Crusher, Yavatmal through Proprietor Shri Pawan S/O Nandlalji Panpaliya Vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, Department of Industry, Energy and Labour, Mumbai and Others

Manish S/O Amol Pusadekar, Since Minor Thr. Natural Guardian Father, Amol S/O Wasudeorao Pusadekar Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Dept. of Tribal Welfare and Social Justice, Mumbai and Anr.

Smt. Ujjawala Wd/O. Suresh Durge and Another Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Dept. of Rural Development, Mumbai and Another