Raheman Khan Mansoor Khan v. The State Of Maharashtra And Others

1 1002-wp 615-2019.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 615 OF 2019 Raheman Khan s/o Mansoor Khan Age : 55 years, Occu. : Nil R/o Akhada Balapur, Tq. Kalamnuri Dist. Hingoli .. Petitioner

Versus

1.

The State of Maharashtra Through - Principal Secretary Irrigation Dept.

Madam Cama Road, Mantralaya, Mumbai-32.

2.

Godavari Marathwada Irrigation Development Corp. Through its Executive Director Near Akashwani, Jalna Road Aurangabad 3.

The Executive Engineer Upper Painganga Project Division-06 Chaitanya Nagar, Nanded-431601 4.

The Sub Divisional Officer (Deputy Engineer) Upper Painganga Project Division - 24 Akhada Balapur, Dist. Hingoli .. Respondents Mr. C. V. Dharurkar, Advocate h/f Mr. Sunil V. Kurundkar, Advocate for the Petitioner.

Mr. A. R. Kale, AGP for Respondent No. 1.

Mr. S. D. Dhongde, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 2 to 4. CORAM : S. V. GANGAPURWALA & S. G. DIGE, JJ.

DATED : 15th DECEMBER, 2021.

2 1002-wp 615-2019.odt ORAL JUDGMENT (PER S. V. GANGAPURWALA, J.) :- .

The petitioner seeks directions against the respondents to extend the benefit of the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001 to the petitioner and to fix the pay scale as prescribed in the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001.

2.

We have heard Mr. Dharurkar, learned counsel holding for Mr. Kurundkar, learned counsel for the petitioner. 3.

Mr. Dhongde, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4 submits that the name of the petitioner appears in Annexure A to the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001 i.e. the persons to be accorded the pay scale of Rs. 2610-4000, however, as the petitioner is litigating in the Court, the said benefit is not advanced. 4.

We cannot comprehend such an argument on behalf of institution. Only because the petitioner approaches the Court for redressal of his grievance that cannot be a ground to negative the claim. The institution has to consider the legitimacy of the claim. 5.

It appears that, under the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001 the decision has been taken regarding the pay scale after conversion to CRT. The name of the petitioner appears at serial no. 36 in Annexure A to the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001. The

3 1002-wp 615-2019.odt matter pending before the learned Single Judge is to the extent of backwages as contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner. The same also would not be an impediment to advance the benefit to the petitioner as per the Government Resolution dated 28.05.2001. 6.

In the light of the above, rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clauses (B) and (C). No costs.

( S. G. DIGE ) ( S. V. GANGAPURWALA ) JUDGE JUDGE P.S.B.