Jaymala Dattatray Patil and Others and Others Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

The Commissioner, Tribal Development Department, Adivasi Vikas Bhavan, Old Mumbai – Agra Road, Ground Floor, Gadkari Chowk, Nashik, Tq. & District Nashik.

¶65

The Additional Commissioner,

¶66

3 939.WP-2340-2024.doc

¶67

Tribal Development Department, Adivasi Vikas Bhavan, Old Mumbai – Agra Road, Ground Floor, Gadkari Chowk, Nashik, Tq. & District Nashik. ...Respondents.

¶68

Advocate for Petitioners : Mr. Rajendrakumar D. Bhalerao AGP for Respondents/State : Mr. P. S. Patil

¶69

CORAM : MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ. DATE : 14 JUNE 2024

¶70

PER COURT :

¶71

. In this petition, the identically placed petitioners have put forth prayer clauses (B), (C) and (D), which read as under :

¶72

“B) This Hon’ble Court, by issuing appropriate writ, order or directions, in the like nature, direct the respondents no.4 to regrant and continue to pay “One Step Pay Scale (Ekstar)” to the petitioners, though petitioners entitled for time bound promotion till petitioners works in Tribal/PESA area, as per Government Resolution dtd.6-8-2002 and as per Hon’ble High Court judgment dtd. 14-7-2021 in Writ Petition St. No.9543/2021.

¶73

C) This Hon’ble Court, by issuing appropriate writ, order or directions, in the like nature, kindly quash and set aside, impugned action of respondents thereby directing to withdraw “One Step Pay Scale” and recovery of alleged excess salary amount paid to the petitioners, as per orders annexed at Exh.-F to H Colly. in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in case of the State of Punjab and others Vs. Rafique Masia (white washer) and others reported in 2015(4) SCC 334, as petitioners are Class-III employees.

¶74

4 939.WP-2340-2024.doc

¶75

D) This Hon’ble Court, by issuing appropriate writ, direct the respondents to fix the pay scale, as per Para-6 of Government Resolution dtd. 14-5-2019 and directed to be paid the salaries petitioners as per “One Step Pay Scale” or pay scale which is more benefited to the petitioners and also directed to made available the option to apply the time bound promotion scale at appropriate time as per Government Resolution dtd. 14-5-2019.”

¶76

We have considered the submissions of the learned advocates for the respective sides and have perused the series of orders passed by this Court in favour of similarly situated petitioners, which have been annexed to the petition.

¶77

In view of the above, we do not find any such circumstances, which would convince us to take a different view.

¶78

The learned advocates representing the respective parties have clearly stated that the order passed by this Court at the Principal Seat, in Writ Petition Stamp No.9543/2021 dated 14/07/2021, is applicable to this case.

¶79

In view of the above, the Writ Petition is allowed in following

¶80

terms :-

¶81

(i) The impugned action of recovery initiated by the respondents is quashed and set aside.

¶82

(ii) The Additional Commissioner, Tribal Development, Nashik – respondent no.4, shall scrutinize the records of all these petitioners and the places, at which they are deployed for performing their duties, within a period of 21 days.

¶83

5 939.WP-2340-2024.doc

¶84

(iii) Those cases, which do not suffer from any legal impediment after verification, shall be cleared by respondent no.4 and the salary benefits, to which they are entitled to, in the light of the one-step payscale made available to the employees working in the tribal and PESA areas, shall be paid, along with their arrears, as well as their current salaries, within a period of four weeks thereafter.

¶85

(iv) After scrutiny, if any of these petitioners, on the basis of their records, are found to be ineligible, respondent no.4, would issue notices to each of such petitioners, so as to enable them to appear before him and address.

¶86

(v) After such hearing, which shall be completed within four months from today, respondent no.4 shall pass appropriate orders and grant benefits of one-step pay-scale to those candidates, who are found to be eligible.

¶87

(vi) Those petitioners, who suffer adverse orders after the above stated exercise is completed, would be at liberty to avail of a statutory remedy, as is permissible in law.

¶88

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.] [ MANGESH S. PATIL, J.]

¶89

Najeeb..

Jaymala Dattatray Patil and Others and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Jaymala Dattatray Patil and Others and Others v. the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vyankat Bandappa Agale Vs the Registrar Co-Operative Societies through Its Secretary and Others

Kundalik Laxman Choudhari Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Prakash Suryakant Dahatondeq Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Principal Secretary and Others

Linesh Tulshiram Khadke Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Vyankatramana Rajaram Manolwar Vs Divisional Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee Latur through Its Member Secretary and Others

Prashansha Manoj Pardeshi through Her Guardian Manoj Asaram Pardeshi Vs the State of Maharashtra and Others