Sonu Lokhande And Others v. Anjuman Hami-E-Islam Anjuman Polytechnic College, Nagpur Through Administrator And Others
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.
2106/2020 1.
Sonu Manik Lokhande, aged about 35 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o C/o Pramila Ramteke, Flat No.504, Panchminar Apartment, Byramji Town, Nagpur.
Wasim Akram, aged about 33 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o C/o Haji Abdul Masjid, Taj Nagar Teka, Near Masjid Shah E Raza, Nagpur.
Mrs. Shubhangi Vinod Pakhale, aged about 36 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o C/o Vinod N. Pakhale, Flat No.201, Yashwant Apartment, Tirupati Nagar, Koradi Road, Nagpur.
Abu Baker Ansari, aged about 32 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o H. No.706, Zeeshan Bichayat Center, Takiya Divan Shah, Mominpura, Nagpur.
Mohd. Shafiquddin, aged about 34 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o Plot No.59, Shashikant Soc. Near Pallotti Nagar, Nagpur.
6.
Sufiyan Ahmad Khan, aged about 32 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o 22 Raza Town, Naka No.2, Kamptee Road, Nagpur.
7.
Smita Ramechandra Khond, aged about 40 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o Parvati Nagar, Masala Road, Post Nalwadi, Near Kala Lawn, Wardha.
8.
Aftab Ahmad, aged about 35 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o Plot No.129, Cooperative Welcome Society, Zingabai Takli, Nagpur.
9.
Furqan Ur Raheem, aged about 35 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o Plot No.4, Near Ahbab Masjid, Ahbab Colony, Anant Nagar, Nagpur.
10. Mrs. Nazneen Khan, aged about 37 Yrs., Occ. Lecturer, R/o Plot No.91 RMS Colony Jafar Nagar, Nagpur.
...
Petitioners - Versus - 1.
Anjuman Hami-e-Islam Anjuman Polytechnic College, Sadar, Nagpur, through its Administrator.
Anjuman Polytechnic College, Sadar, Nagpur, through its Principal.
The All India Council for Technical Education, through its Chairman.
The Director of Technical Education.
The Maharashtra State Board of
Technical Education, through the Dy. Secretary, Nagpur.
... Respondent s ----------------- Mr. S. Zia Qazi, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. R.J. Mirza, Advocate for respondent No.1. Mr. N.P. Lambat, Advocate for respondent No.3. Mr. N.S. Rao, Assistant Government Pleader for Respondent No.4.
Mr. P.R. Puri, Advocate for Respondent No.5.
---------------- CORAM : SUNIL B. SHUKRE AND ANIL L. PANSARE, JJ.
DATE : 17.11.2022 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Sunil B. Shukre, J.) Heard finally by consent of learned counsel for the parties.
It is submitted on behalf of the petitioners that the issue involved in this petition wherein the petitioners have claimed payment of higher salary to them as per the 7th Pay Commission has now been settled amicably by each of the petitioners with respondent Nos.1 and 2. It is further submitted that the settlement terms are recorded in the compromise pursis,
which is now produced before the Court. The compromise pursis is taken on record and collectively marked as document "A" for identification.
On going through the terms of the compromise pursis, it is seen that the parties at dispute have agreed for payment of salary to the petitioners as per the recommendations of the 6th Pay Commission as included and mentioned in the chart annexed to the petition as Annexure P-1. It is further seen that the parties have agreed for payment of salary as per the new pay fixation from 2022 onwards. There are also terms and conditions dealing with the aspect of payment of arrears of salary, withdrawal of the show cause notices and governing of the salary of the petitioners as per law and withdrawal of all other claims and the prayers made by the petitioners in the writ petition. Learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for respondent No.4 so also Mr. Lambat, learned counsel for respondent No.3 and Mr. Puri learned counsel for respondent
No.5 have no objection if the petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise pursis.
All the petitioners are personally present before the Court and they are identified by their learned counsel. All of them state that they have no objection for amicable settlement of the matter and the terms and conditions of compromise are acceptable to them. Similar statement is made by the Principal of the College on behalf of respondent Nos.1 and 2. The Principal is identified by Mr. Mirza, learned counsel for respondent No.1. 6.
In view of the above, the petition is disposed of in terms of the compromise pursis, document A.
7.
Rule is made absolute in the above terms. No costs. (ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) (SUNIL B. SHUKRE, J.) Tambaskar.
Signed By:NILESH VILASRAO TAMBASKAR Private Secretary Date:21.11.2022 10:18