Bharat Gajenra Hembade And ORS v. The State Of Maharashtra Through The Secretary Education Department Mantralaya And ORS
by ARUNA SANDEEP TALWALKAR Date:
2025.04.19 15:20:19 +0530 ARUNA SANDEEP TALWALKAR
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4973 OF 2025 Bharat Gajendra Hembade & Ors.
... Petitioners.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors.
... Respondents.
**** Mr.
Satish S. Raut, Advocate for the Petitioners. Mr. Abhijeet Naik, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2/State. Ms. Priyanka B. Chavan, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 to 5 Solapur Z.P.
**** CORAM :
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE AND ASHWIN D. BHOBE, JJ.
DATE :
15th APRIL, 2025 P.C. :
1.
A small issue falls for our consideration. Whether all these Petitioners, who have retired from service and are in the Class- III category, could be subjected to recovery of amounts on the ground that the said amounts were paid as travelling allowances and they were not entitled for the same. Such travelling allowance was paid from 1995 onwards till their superannuation.
2.
The service details of all these Petitioners, as laid out in the Petition, are reproduced hereunder vide a ready reference chart :
Sr no Retired Name of Kendra Pramukh Date Of Appointment Date Of Retirement Date Of Superannuation Recovery Amount Of Travelling Allowence Bharat Gajendra Hembade 5/7/1985 31/5/2020 8/8/2013 19800 Ramchandra Janardan Patil 5/7/1985 31/5/2021 8/8/2013 19800 Gopinath Sadashiv Hembade 12/7/1985 31/5/2020 1/7/2015 19800 Hiralal Aananda Kondubgairi 8/7/1985 31/5/2022 8/8/2013 19800 Bhimashankar Sidram Jatkar 8/1/1986 31/5/2022 15/6/1995 19800 Purshottam Gemu Rathod 20/3/1989 Working 22/10/2008 19800 Ishwar Dhondiba Bhosale 9/1/1986 31/5/203 22/6/1999 19800 Shivshankar Dondappa Vijapure 20/1/1984 31/7/2018 3/1/2008 19800 Malsidha Shivgonda Vhanmane 25/1/1984 31/7/2018 17/7/2014 - Maruti Raosaheb Kangude 9/7/1985 31/5/2018 8/8/2013 - Hanmant Nagappa Kore 20/1/1984 31/5/2016 3/1/2008 - Anil Dattatray Salunke 5/7/1985 31/5/2016 13/8/2013 -
3.
The learned Advocate for the Zilla Parishad and the learned AGP, have vehemently opposed this Petition. They submit that the money paid to the Petitioners belongs to the tax payer and, therefore, it cannot be mis-utilised. The learned Advocate for the Petitioners submits that though the money belongs to the tax payer, they are not guilty of misrepresentation or deceit or a fraud, in receiving such travelling allowance. The Zilla Parishad paid them the travelling allowance as per the approved Rules. It was for the Zilla Parishad to consider whether such Rules were applicable to the Petitioners or not. After their superannuation, as per the dates mentioned in the chart, recoveries cannot be initiated in the light of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Syed Abdul Qadir vs. State of Bihar and others1 and State of Punjab and other vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) etc.2 4.
Considering the above and the law laid down in the judgments cited, we find that the submissions of the learned Advocate for the Petitioners are well placed. Post retirement, such amounts could not have been recovered and more so, that none of these Petitioners are alleged to have played a fraud in receiving such travelling allowance. 2009 (3) SCC 475 2 (2015) 4 SCC 334
5.
In view of the above, the Petition is allowed. 6.
Since no order was passed by the Zilla Parishad for carrying out any recovery, save and except, that the retiral benefits of the Petitioners have been withheld, we direct that the said benefits shall be released within a period of 60 days from today along with interest at the rate of 6% p.a. If the retiral benefits are not released within 60 days from today, the rate of interest would increase to 7 % p.a. and the entire interest component would be recovered from the salary of the officer, who is responsible for the delay in the disbursement of such amounts. (ASHWIN D. BHOBE, J.) (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)