Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Chandrashekhar s/o Devidas Deshmukh, a retired Tax Collector from Amravati Municipal Corporation, filed a writ petition challenging an enquiry report and removal order dated 22/05/2007. The petition sought quashing of the enquiry, removal order, and directions for reinstatement with back wages and pensionary benefits. At the notice stage, the petitioner's counsel conceded that the challenge to the removal order was barred by delay and laches, as the removal occurred in 2007 and the petition was filed in 2022. Consequently, the court confined the notice to the issue of pensionary benefits. The court noted that the petitioner had retired on 31/08/2010 and was entitled to pension and gratuity. The respondents argued that the removal order was valid and that the petitioner was not entitled to benefits. The court held that while the challenge to the removal was dismissed due to delay, the petitioner's right to pensionary benefits could not be denied solely on that ground. The court directed the respondents to consider and release the petitioner's pension and gratuity in accordance with the applicable rules within three months. The petition was partly allowed.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pensionary Benefits - Delay and Laches - Petitioner challenged removal order after 15 years; challenge dismissed as hit by delay and laches - However, court held that pensionary benefits are not forfeited merely due to delay in challenging removal, and directed payment of pension and gratuity as per rules (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits despite the challenge to the removal order being dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Final Decision
The petition is partly allowed. The challenge to the removal order is dismissed as barred by delay and laches. The respondents are directed to consider and release the petitioner's pension and gratuity in accordance with the applicable rules within three months.
Law Points
- Delay and laches
- Pensionary benefits
- Natural justice
- Enquiry report
- Removal order
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (01) 291
Writ Petition No.2137 of 2022
Rohit B. Deo, Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi
Mr. Prakash D. Meghe for petitioner, Mr. J.B. Kasat for respondents 1 and 2, Mr. N.S. Rao, A.G.P. for respondent 3-State
Chandrashekhar s/o Devidas Deshmukh
Amravati Municipal Corporation, Deputy Commissioner (Admn.), State of Maharashtra
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petition challenging enquiry report and removal order, seeking reinstatement and pensionary benefits.
Remedy Sought
Petitioner sought quashing of enquiry report and removal order, reinstatement with back wages, and release of pension, gratuity, GPF, and other arrears.
Filing Reason
Petitioner was removed from service on 22/05/2007 and retired on 31/08/2010; he challenged the removal and sought pensionary benefits.
Previous Decisions
At notice stage, petitioner's counsel conceded that challenge to removal was barred by delay and laches; notice confined to pensionary benefits.
Issues
Whether the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits despite the challenge to the removal order being dismissed on the ground of delay and laches.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that he is entitled to pensionary benefits as he retired on 31/08/2010.
Respondents opposed, stating that the removal order was valid and the petitioner was not entitled to benefits.
Ratio Decidendi
Pensionary benefits are not automatically forfeited due to delay in challenging a removal order; the employee's right to pension and gratuity must be considered on its own merits under the applicable rules.
Judgment Excerpts
While issuing notice, vide order dated 28th April, 2022, the Coordinate Bench recorded the statement made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the challenge in respect of prayer clauses (i) to (iv) is not pressed, inasmuch as the challenge is hit by delay amounting to latches.
In view of the said statement, notice was confined to the submission that the petitioner is entitled to pensionary benefits.
Procedural History
Petitioner filed Writ Petition No.2137 of 2022 in 2022 challenging removal order dated 22/05/2007. On 28/04/2022, coordinate bench recorded that challenge to removal was not pressed due to delay, and notice was confined to pensionary benefits. Final hearing on 28/02/2023.
