Subhash Narayan Kharatmol v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 wp 2117.19

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 2117 OF 2019 SUBHASH NARAYAN KHARATMOL

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Dhakne Vijay A. AGP for Respondents : Mr. S. G. Karlekar ...

CORAM:S. V. GANGAPURWALA & ANIL S. KILOR, JJ.

DATE: 01 st OCTOBER, 2019 PER COURT:

1.

Mr. Dhakne, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Teacher on 23.06.2003. Upon completion of twelve years of his service on 23.06.2015, the petitioner is entitled for time bound promotional pay scale. The Project Officer had forwarded the proposal to the Commissioner. The Commissioner passed an order directing to accord the benefit to the petitioner. The said order is not implemented.

2 wp 2117.19 2.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was never promoted as a full fledged Headmaster. He was directed to be given temporary charge. The earlier Headmaster has also filed the writ petition before this Court. The institution has taken the signatures of the petitioner on blank papers and now are trying to misuse the same. The learned counsel submits that the petitioner cannot be denied the benefit of time bound promotional pay scale. The order of the Commissioner is still intact.

3.

Mr. Karlekar, the learned Assistant Government Pleader submits that the petitioner has given letter dated 11.12.2017 and affidavit dated 20.12.2017 denying promotion to the post of Headmaster. If the candidate seeks benefit of time bound promotional pay scale and denies the promotional post, then he is not entitled for the benefit of the time bound promotional pay scale. 4.

We have considered the submissions canvassed by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

3 wp 2117.19 learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondents.

5.

It needs no discussion that, if the petitioner is eligible for promotion and the petitioner denies the promotional post, then in that case he cannot claim the benefit of time bound promotional pay scale.

6.

The Assistant Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Kalamnuri, District - Hingoli has filed affidavit in reply. Along with the affidavit in reply he has filed letter issued by the petitioner dated 11.12.2017, in which the petitioner has categorically accepted that because of the workload and the stress involved he is not in a position to withstand the same, and as such his responsibilities as a Headmaster should be done away with. On 20.12.2017, the affidavit is filed on a stamp paper of Rs. 100/-. The same appears to have been notarised. The stamp paper appears to have been purchased by the petitioner. The signature of the petitioner appears as having

4 wp 2117.19 purchased the stamp paper and of having signed before the notary. The contents of the affidavit reads thus - "महोदय, उपरोकववषयासअनुसरनआपणासववनंतीकरणयातयेतेवक, आपणमलाजेषमा.

शशककमहणूनवद. ०९/०९/ २०१७रोजीशी.

सरसवतीमाधयवमकआशमशाळानागेशवाडीता.

औंढाजज.

हहगोलीयेथील माधयवमकमुखयाधयपकपदाचाववद. १६/९/ १७पासूनशी. शारदा माधयवमकवउचमाधय.

आशमशाळाढोलकयाचीवाडीयेथीलमाधयवमक मुखयधयापक पदाचा तातपुरता अततररक पदभार वदलेला आहे. तसेच मुखयाधयापकपदावरकायमकरणेबाबतचापसताववररषकायारलयास मानयतेकररतासंसथासादरकरणारआहे.

परंतुमाझीSuger (मधुमेह) सारखीवाढतआहे.

तसेचमलाउचरकदाबाचा(B.P.) सुदातास जासतजाणवतआहे.

डॉकटरांनीमलाअसासलावदलाआहेकी, तुमहाला तणावरवहतजीवनजगावेलागेल.

तयामुळे माझयाकडेअसलेलापदाचा कामाचावयापवतनावपाहतामीहेपदमाझयातबयेतीमुळेसांभाळूशकत नाही.

सदरीलपदजरमाझयाकडेरावहलेतरतयाचामाझयाववषयाचया अधयापनावरसुदापररणामहोऊशकतो.

तयामुळेमाझयातबयेतीकररताव ववदारयारचयाभववषयाकररतामाझयाकडेअसलेलामाधयवमकमुखयाधयापक पदाचाअततररकपदभारकमीकरणयातयावावमुखयाधयापकपदाचाकायम कारणेबाबतचापसतावमाझासादरकरणयातयेऊनये.

वहनमववनंती.

मीहामुखयाधयापकपदावरीलमाझाहककोणतयाहीदबावालाबळीन पडता सवतःहून सोडत आहे.

माझयाकडील अततररक पदभार आपण कोणाकडेहीवदलयासमाझाकाहीहीआकेपराहणारनाहीवमुखयधयपकपदावर दावासुदाकरणारनाही.

तेवहामा.

अधयकसाहेबांनीमाझयाअजारचा सहानुभूतीपूवरकववचारकरनमलापररणामकारकअधयापनकरणयाचीसंधी दावी.

वहनमववनंती.

मे.

साहेबांनीमाझयाअजारचाववचारकरनमलासंधीवदलयासमी आपलाआभारीराहील."

7.

The petitioner has unequivocally stated that he should not be given the responsibilities of the Headmaster and in future also he will not claim the post of Headmaster.

5 wp 2117.19 8.

According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the said affidavit is forged one. 9.

Forgery has to be established by evidence.

Prima facie, the signatures are not disputed on the affidavit and the stamp paper.

10. As the petitioner has denied the promotional post, naturally he cannot clam the benefit of time bound promotional pay scale.

11. In the light of above, writ petition stands disposed of. No costs.

[ANIL S. KILOR, J.] [S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.] marathe