Harshwardhan Govind Nachane And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Thr The Secretary, Edu. Dept. And ORS
Digitally signed by GAURI AMIT GAEKWAD Date:
2024.12.13 10:13:16 +0530 GAURI AMIT GAEKWAD
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.17960 OF 2024 Harshwardhan Govind Nachane and Ors. ....Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
....Respondents ---- Mr. Satish S. Raut for the Petitioners.
Mr. P.P. Kakade, Addl. GP a/w. Mrs. Reena Salunkhe, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 and 2.
Mr. Anand Kulkarni for Respondent Nos.3 and 4. ---- CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE & ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE : 9th DECEMBER, 2024 ORAL FINAL ORDER (Per Ravindra V. Ghuge, J.) :- 1.
All the Petitioners are identically placed. The learned Advocate representing the Respondent Zilla Parishad, Solapur agrees.
2.
The Petitioners are employees who were working with the Respondent Zilla Parishad and have superannuated from employment. All of them were subjected to recovery of amounts, purportedly for the reason that excess amounts were paid to them, under wrongful revised pay scales/erroneous revised pay scales,
calculated on the basis of acquiring the certificate of MS-CIT etc. These pay scales were revised more than a decade ago. 3.
The grievance of these Petitioners is that recoveries have been initiated against them, from their retiral benefits/ pensionary benefits. In some cases, amounts have already been recovered. A chart showing the details of the petitioners, their dates of superannuation, dates of impugned orders and amounts recovered from their retiral benefits/pensionary benefits, are as under : Sr.
No.
Retired Teacher's Name Amount Retired Z.P.
School Date Of Impugned Of Recovery Date Order (In Rupees) Harshwardhan Govind Nachane 683965 31/05/2024 Akluj 02/06/2024 Mahabaleswar KedarLing kumbhar 46560 31/11/2019 Malshiras 20/12/2019 Surekha Prakash Bagade 94466 31/05/2023 Borgaon 04/12/2017 Shailaja Narayan Jadhav 283789 31/05/2023 Tandulwadi 02/05/2024 Kayamsaheb Hajratnur Kazi 13987 31/05/2019 Isalmpur 27/01/2020 Anna Rama Helkar 23013 31/05/2018 Tirvandi 29/05/2018 Uttam Lahu Bhosale 31/05/2020 Borgaon 09/11/2020 Mahananda Abasaheb 140561 31/05/2023 Morochi 17/12/2019
Karche Rohini Changdev Gund 41368 31/07/2019 Velapur 30/12/2019 Kisan Baba Kokare 26499 31/05/2019 Papri 10/08/2018 Jayshri Sharad Khatavkar 31/05/2020 Pisewasti Giravi 07/02/2020 Madhukar Pandurang Pawar 60386 31/05/2023 Aandhalgaon 17/07/2015 23958 31/05/2019 Mangalvedha 04/01/2020 Tukaram Revanshiddha Nigadi Rajshri Sandipan Mane 97512 28/02/2019 Kurduwadi 29/05/2019 Kamodini Vitthal Dhobale 142399 31/05/2005 Kanya Malshiras 03/10/2006 Anagha Anil Ajotikar 38852 31/01/2015 Islampur 15/04/2015 Mohan Vitthal Shelake(Decease d) Latika Mohan Shelake 168533 03/12/2022 Motewadi 21/09/2023 Bhausaheb Dattatray Kulkarni 44868 31/05/2017 Adegaon 14/07/2017 31/05/2023 Markadwadi 16/12/2020 Jayshri Nandkumar Dahival Shikandar Mahamud Mujawar 47148 31/05/2023 Garwad 24/09/2023 Pradipkumar Vasant Uplekar 18124 31/03/2018 Ropale 10/09/2018 Suresh Bhanudas Dudhal 267371 12/12/2022 Pisewasti Giravi 26/09/2023 Hanif Abdulrahim 23958 31/05/2018 Kurduwadi 09/08/2018
Mulla Baidabai Eknath Chavan 314474 31/05/2022 Dobasewasti Velapur 01/09/2023 Raju Jagganath Ghadage 116606 31/05/2023 Pisewadi 09/12/2023 Bebinanda Dagadu Pawar 28/02/2023 Kashegaon Pandharpur 01/09/2023 Maruti Mahadev Khupase 30/06/2019 Khudus 23/10/2019 4.
We have considered the strenuous submissions of the learned Advocates. It is, however, undisputed that none of these Petitioners had played any fraud or were personally involved in wrongful revision of their pay scales or orchestrating wrongful revision by manipulating the record. There is no allegation of fraud or deceit against any of them. No undertaking was acquired from them as and when the revised pay scale become payable. In some cases, at the stroke of retirement, a condition was imposed that they should execute an undertaking and in these coercive circumstances, that undertaking were extracted from some of them. 5.
The learned Advocate representing the Zilla Parishad as well as the learned AGP, submit that once an undertaking is executed, the case of the Petitioners would be covered by the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court of Punjab
and Haryana and others vs. Jagdev Singh, 2016 AIR (SCW) 3523. Reliance is placed on the judgment delivered by this Court on 1st September, 2021, in Writ Petition No. 13262 of 2018 filed by Ananda Vikram Baviskar Vs. State of Maharashtra and others. 6.
We have referred to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others vs. Jagdev Singh (supra). However, the record reveals that no undertaking was taken from these Petitioners when the pay scales were revised. The undertakings from some of them were taken at the stroke of their retirement.
7.
An undertaking has to be taken from the candidate on the day the revised pay scale is made applicable to him and the payment commences. At the stroke of superannuation of the said employee, asking him to tender an undertaking, practically amounts to an afterthought on the part of the employer and a mode of compelling the candidate to execute an undertaking since they are apprehensive that their retiral benefits would not be released until such undertaking is executed. Such an undertaking will not have the same sanctity of an undertaking executed when the payment of
revised pay scale had commenced. We, therefore, respectfully conclude that the view taken in High Court of Punjab and Haryana and others vs. Jagdev Singh (supra), would not be applicable to the case of these Petitioners, more so since the recovery is initiated after their superannuation.
8.
Taking into account that these Petitioners were not involved in any mischief, fraud or deceit in orchestrating their wrongful pay revision, the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Syed Abdul Qadir vs. State of Bihar and others, 2009 (3) SCC 475 and State of Punjab and other vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc. (2015) 4 SCC 334 = AIR 2015 SC 696, would apply to this case.
9.
The Writ Petition is partly allowed. The impugned orders are quashed and set aside. The amounts due and payable to the Petitioners, as well as to the widows and other legal heirs, if that is the case, after the superannuation of the said employees/death of the employees, would be paid to these Petitioners or their widows or other legal heirs, if that is the case, within a period of 90 days.
10.
The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits, on instructions, that the Petitioners would not claim any interest on the amount which has already been recovered from them, to the extent of it's repayment. In view thereof, if the amounts are not paid within 90 days, interest at the rate of Rs.5% p.a. from the date of this order, will be paid.
(ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)