Smt. Shubhangi Budhbhushan Karadkar And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra Through Principal Secretary And Another

Sherla V.

wp.7989.2014+_907.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.7989 OF 2014 Smt.Shubhangi Buddhabhushan Karadkar & Ors.

.. Petitioners Vs.

State of Maharashtra & anr.

... Respondents a/w WRIT PETITION NO.7990 OF 2014 Smt.Shobha Annarao Nadgeri & Ors.

... Petitioners Vs.

State of Maharashtra & anr.

... Respondents Mr.Amit Borkar for the Petitioners Ms.S.S. Bhende, Assistant Government Pleader, for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 CORAM: SMT. VASANTI A. NAIK & SHRI C.V. BHADANG, JJ.

DATE: 11th FEBRUARY, 2015 P.C.:

Heard.

The learned Counsel for the petitioners states that the issue involved in these petitions was also involved in Writ Petition No.2046 of 2010 and the Nagpur Bench of the Bombay High Court had, by the judgment dated 19.10.2013 partly allowed the writ petition and directed the respondents to regularise the services and confer the permanency on such petitioners, who have completed 3 years' service with technical breaks. It is stated that by the said judgment, the High Court has protected the petitioners, who 1 / 2

wp.7989.2014+_907.doc were in continuous employment. The learned Counsel states that a similar order may be passed in these petitions also and the respondents may be directed to pay the regular salary from 1.2.2015. Ms.Bhende, the learned Assistant Government Pleader, appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos.1 and 2, does not dispute the statement made on behalf of the petitioners.

Hence, for the reasons recorded in the judgment dated 19.10.2013 in Writ Petition No.2046 of 2010, we partly allow the writ petitions and direct the respondents to regularise the services and confer permanency on the petitioners, as they have completed 3 years of service with technical breaks and they are still in service. The respondents are directed to absorb the petitioners within a period of 6 weeks and pay the regular salary to the petitioners from the date of their absorption. Just like the order passed in the Writ Petition No.2046 of 2010, though we direct the respondents to grant continuity of service to the petitioners, we make it clear that the petitioners would not be entitled to claim any monetary benefits towards the past services rendered by them.

Order accordingly. No order as to costs.

(C.V. BHADANG, J.) (VASANTI A. NAIK, J.) 2 / 2