Gopal Sakharam Pathak v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary And Others

*1*

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 908 WRIT PETITION NO.1779 OF 2023 SHIVAJI DHONDIBA GAIKWAD 909 WRIT PETITION NO.1785 OF 2023 NARHARI RAJARAM THORAT 910 WRIT PETITION NO.1786 OF 2023 BHIKAJI FAKIRRAO DODKE 911 WRIT PETITION NO.1787 OF 2023 GOPAL SAKHARAM PATHAK 912 WRIT PETITION NO.1788 OF 2023 SHAHINKHAN YASINKHAN PATHAN

*2* 913 WRIT PETITION NO.1789 OF 2023 SARJERAO BHGWANRAO PAWAR 914 WRIT PETITION NO.1790 OF 2023 RAMKISAN RENABHAU ZAGDE 915 WRIT PETITION NO.1791 OF 2023 UDDHAV RAMBAHU SONPIR 916 WRIT PETITION NO.1792 OF 2023 RAJARAM MAROTIRAO SHENDRE 917 WRIT PETITION NO.1793 OF 2023 SK ISMAIL SK MANNU

*3* 918 WRIT PETITION NO.1794 OF 2023 ABDUL NAEEM MOHD IBRAHIM ANSARI 919 WRIT PETITION NO.1795 OF 2023 KALYAN RAMBHAU TOPE Advocate for the Petitioners : Shri Telgaonkar Uttam L. AGPs for Respondents 1 and 2/State : Shri S.G. Sangle, Shri V.M. Kagne, Shri S.K. Tambe and Shri P.S. Patil, in the respective petitions.

Advocate for Respondent 3 in WP 1779, 1786, 1789 and 1719/2023 : Shri A.B. Kadethankar Advocate for Respondent 3 in WP 1787, 1788, 1790 and 1795/2023 : Shri C.K. Shinde Advocate for Respondent 3 in WP 1792, 1793, 1794 and for Respondents 3 and 4 in WP 1785/2023 : Shri R.J. Godbole CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, JJ.

DATE :- 14th February, 2023 Per Court :- 1.

The petitioners are identically placed. In the first

*4* Writ Petition No.1779/2023, they have put forth prayer clause (B), which reads as under :- "B) By issuing writ of Mandamus or any appropriate writ, order or direction in like nature, to direct the respondents to grant one notional increment to the petitioner with all consequential benefits including pensionary benefits in view of the order dated 08.08.2019 passed by The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Review Petition No.1731/2019 in SLP No.22008/2018 in case of Union of India and others vs. P. Ayyamperumal."

2.

The learned counsel representing the respondents, jointly submit that, these petitioners have never approached any authority, seeking redressal of their grievance. In the absence of making any request for such redressal, they have directly approached this Court, praying for issuance of a Writ of Mandamus. Without approaching the authorities, an order is sought from this Court, on the premises, as if the respondents are not discharging their duties and are not exercising the jurisdiction duly vested in them by law.

3.

The learned advocate for the petitioners submits that, the petitioners would make a representation to the concerned respondents and rely upon various orders. The petitioners pray that the said representation be considered on it's

*5* individual merits and in the light of the orders of this Court. 4.

In view of the above, these Writ Petitions are disposed off.

5.

Let the petitioners prefer individual representations to respondent No.3 and/or respondent No.4, as the case may be. Let such representations be filed on or before 15/12/2022. 5.

We request the said respondent to consider the representations of the petitioners on their merits, by carefully scrutinizing each of the cases. After due verification, if these petitioners are found to be eligible for monetary benefits, the said respondent would endeavour to pass appropriate orders. Let this exercise be completed by 31/03/2023. Needless to state, if the claim of any of the petitioners or similarly situated employees, is found to be ineligible, an order may be passed assigning reasons and the said order be communicated to the concerned person. kps (SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)