BANDOPANT KISHANRAO PATHAK AND ORS. Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA TOWN PLANNING & MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, MANTRALAYA AND ORS.
LAWS(BOM)-2016-4-75
HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Decided on April 28,2016

Bandopant Kishanrao Pathak And Ors. Appellant
VERSUS
The State Of Maharashtra Town Planning And Municipal Administration Department, Mantralaya And Ors. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

S.S. Shinde, J. - (1.) These Writ Petitions are filed seeking directions to the respondents to grant pensionary benefits i.e. gratuity and leave encashment and amount of arrears of 6th pay commission to the petitioners as per the Government Resolution dated 2nd February, 2008, and further seeking directions to respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to pay the pension from their Department i.e. Accountant General, Nagpur as per Government Resolution dated 2nd February, 2008.
(2.) It is the case of the petitioners that in the year 1979 and 1983 respectively, the petitioners were appointed as Clerks by respondent No. 5 Municipal Council Gangakhed. The petitioners have been given promotions as well as other service benefits regularly. As per the orders dated 30.04.2013 and 30.11.2012, the petitioners got retired from services from the posts of Assistant Accountant as well as Tax Valuer and Administrative Service, and from the post of Labour Supervisor respectively on attaining the age of superannuation. It is further the case of the petitioners that the Government of Maharashtra has passed Resolution on 02.02.2008 whereunder the employees, who were working in the various Municipal Councils, were treated as employees of the State Government. It means, by the said Resolution, the petitioners' services stood absorbed in the cadre of Maharashtra State Nagar Parishad Karmachari [in short 'MSNPK']. The petitioners have placed on record the copy of the said Government Resolution. It is further the case of the petitioners that they have rendered near about 35 and 29 years of service respectively under the control and supervision of respondent No. 5 Municipal Council Gangakhed.
(3.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners further submits that the services of the petitioners have been absorbed by the State Authority in the cadre of Maharashtra State Nagar Parishad Karmachari in 2008 and 2010 respectively. However, till date, no effective steps have been taken by the respondents to grant pensionary benefits i.e. gratuity and leave encashment to the petitioners, as per the said Government Resolution. It is submitted that the petitioners are not getting pension from respondent No. 5 regularly, therefore, it is necessary to direct respondent No. 1 to pay pension to the petitioners from the office of Accountant General, Nagpur. It is submitted that though the petitioners have repeatedly made representations, they have not been given pensionary benefits from the respondents till today. It is submitted that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have also passed the order dated 4th November, 2010, wherein it is clearly mentioned that the services of the petitioners are absorbed finally in the cadre of MSNPK. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioners invited our attention to the copies of letters written by respondent No. 4 and the order dated 4th November, 2010, issued by respondent No. 2. It is submitted that since the petitioners have been absorbed in the cadre of the MSNPK, and also the respondent authorities have clearly mentioned that all these employees are treated as State employees, they are entitled to get all the benefits, as has been mentioned in the Maharashtra Civil Services Rules as well as in the Pension Rules thereunder. But till date, the petitioners could not get such benefits. He further invited our attention to the provisions of the Notification dated 11th January, 2007, issued by the Urban Development Department. By the said Notification, the Rules have been framed governing the services of the employees of the Maharashtra Municipal Councils, Nagar Panchayats and Industrial Townships State Services. The said Rules of 2006 have been framed for absorption, recruitment and conditions governing the services of the said employees. The learned counsel invites our attention to the definition of the absorbed employees and submits that the 'absorbed employee' means an Existing Employee in the service of any Municipal Council absorbed in any Grade of any Service in accordance with these Rules. He further submits that the Absorption Authority has already included the names of the petitioners in the list of absorbed employees, and therefore, the petitioners are entitled to get pensionary benefits from the respondent - State, having been absorbed as State employees.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.