Eknath Gangaram Bhanuse v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Its Secretary And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 930 WRIT PETITION NO. 7438 OF 2023 EKNATH GANGARAM BHANUSE

VERSUS

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ...

Advocate for Petitioner : Mr. Murge Estling S. AGP for Respondent No. 1 : Mr. A.A. Jagatkar Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 & 3 : Mr. V.M. Vibhute ...

CORAM

: MANGESH S. PATIL & SHAILESH P. BRAHME, JJ.

DATE : 05 JULY 2023 PC :

The petitioner who is a District Awardee Teacher since prior to the year 2018 is aggrieved by the circular dated 04 September 2018, whereby, such awardees have been held to be not entitled to get the additional increment.

2.

We have heard the learned Advocate for the petitioner and the learned AGP as well as leaned Advocate Mr. Vibhute, who appears for the respondent nos. 2 and 3.

3.

In similar set of facts, this Court had directed the respondent - Zilla Parishad, to ascertain the fact of award and further held that he is a recipient of such award prior to the issuance of circular dated 04 September 2018 and therefore he would be entitled to an additional increment in view of G.R. dated 12 December 2000. The

order has been confirmed by the Supreme Court in the matter of The Chief Executive Officer, Nasik Zilla Parishad, Nasik and another Versus Nitin Dattatray Pawar and others, in SLP No. 19730 of 2021, dated 13 April, 2022.

4.

Writ Petition is allowed. The respondent nos. 2 and 3, are at liberty to satisfy themselves about the petitioner being a District Awardee Teacher prior to the issuance of circular dated 04 September 2018, and if it is so, shall grant him an additional increment as per Government Resolution dated 12 December 2000. The decision shall be taken as expeditiously as possible and in any case within a period of eight weeks and the arrears shall be paid within eight weeks, thereafter.

[ SHAILESH P. BRAHME ] [ MANGESH S. PATIL ] JUDGE JUDGE spc/