Allowed

Shri Kishnakumar S/O Babarao Kakpure v. the Commissioner, Handicap Welfare Commissionerate, Pune and Others

Bombay HC25 Oct 2024WP/4363/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition challenged an order refusing the first SEP to a Special Educator due to school closure. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, quashed the refusal and recovery communication, holding the petitioner entitled to the benefit.

What did the court decide?

Impugned order refusing first SEP quashed; recovery communication quashed; petitioner held entitled to first SEP.

Shri Kishnakumar S/O Babarao Kakpure Vs the… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2024)

¶1

1 1 wp 4363-2019

¶2

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

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.4363/2019

¶4

Shri Kishnakumar s/o Babarao Kakpure

¶5

Vs.

¶6

The Commissioner, Handicap Welfare Commissionerate, Pune and others

¶7

¶8

Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

Court's or Judge's orders

¶10

- - - - Shri G.G. Bade, Advocate for petitioner Shri A.V. Palshikar, AGP for respondent No.1 Shri B.N. Jaipurkar, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4

¶11

CORAM : AVINASH G. GHAROTE AND SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, JJ.. DATED : 25/10/2024

¶12

Heard Shri G.G. Bade, learned Counsel for petitioner, Shri A.V. Palshikar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for respondent No.1/State and Shri B.N. Jaipurkar, Advocate for respondent Nos.3 and 4.

¶13

The petition questions the communication dated 12/13.04.2018 issued by the respondent No.1 (page 25), by which the first SEP upon completion of 12 years has been refused to be granted to the petitioner on the ground that upon deduction of the period, during which the school was closed, the period of 12 years is not completed. Reliance is placed upon Government Resolution dated 27.01.2004 (page 39). However Clause-3 of the Government Resolution itself indicts that, for the duration of break-in-service, on account of the closure of the school, the same would not be considered. As such for the purpose of considering continuity of service, the same would be

¶14

2 1 wp 4363-2019

¶15

considered for the purpose of determining and notional continuity for granting salary and other benefits.

¶16

In that view of the matter, we do not see any reason to sustain the impugned order, the same is, therefore, hereby quashed and set aside and it is held that petitioner is entitled for the first SEP on account of which, the recovery is held to be bad in law and the communication dated 02.05.2019 (page 26) proposing recovery is also hereby quashed and set aside.

¶17

The Writ Petition is allowed in the above terms. No order as to costs.

¶18

( SMT. M.S. JAWALKAR, J.) ( AVINASH G. GHAROTE, J.)

¶19

R.S. Sahare

Shri Kishnakumar S/O Babarao Kakpure v. the Commissioner, Handicap Welfare Commissionerate, Pune and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shri Kishnakumar S/O Babarao Kakpure v. the Commissioner, Handicap Welfare Commissionerate, Pune and Others

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

Ayub Khan Habib Khan Pathan Vs the Secretary Education Department Government of Maharashtra, Mumbai and Others

Bilt Graphic Paper Products Limited, through Its Dy Manager Legal, Mr. Pawan D Meshram Vs Shri Rajagopal Devara, Additional Chief Secretary, State of Maha., Dept. of Revenue, Mumbai

Manish Manohar Sarda Vs Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Thr. Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur and Another

Sahil Sanjay Rathod vs Swati Sahil Rathod

Western Coalfields Limited Thr. Chairman-Cum-Managing Director, Nagpur and Another vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Dept. of Revenue and Forest, Mumbai and Another

Sahil Sanjay Rathod vs Swati Sahil Rathod