Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Deelip S/o Harishchandra Jadhav, a retired employee of Government Polytechnic College, Dhule, filed two writ petitions seeking pensionary benefits. The first petition (Writ Petition No. 514 of 2015) challenged the judgment and order dated 04.09.2009 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad Bench, in Original Application No. 1024/1999, which had rejected his claim for treating the period from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 as pensionable service. The second petition (Writ Petition No. 6146 of 2014) challenged the decision/order dated 03.04.2013 passed by respondent No.3, which also denied the same relief. The petitioner argued that the break in service was not due to any fault on his part and should be condoned for pension purposes. The respondents opposed the petitions. The court, after hearing both sides, allowed the petitions, quashed the impugned orders, and directed the respondents to reconsider the petitioner's pensionary benefits by condoning the broken period and treating it as pensionable service, with all consequential benefits.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Pensionary Benefits - Broken Period Service - Condonation of Break - Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 - The petitioner sought condonation of a break in service from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 for pensionary benefits. The court held that the break period should be condoned and treated as pensionable service, directing the respondents to reconsider pensionary benefits accordingly. (Paras 1-3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the period from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 should be treated as pensionable service by condoning the broken period in the petitioner's service.
Final Decision
Both writ petitions are allowed. The impugned judgment and order dated 04.09.2009 passed by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad Bench, in Original Application No. 1024/1999, and the impugned decision/order dated 03.04.2013 passed by respondent No.3 are quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to reconsider the pensionary benefits of the petitioner by condoning the broken period from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 and treating it as pensionable service, with all consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Pensionary benefits
- broken period service
- condonation of break
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules
- 1982
Case Details
2015 LawText (BOM) (04) 5
Writ Petition No. 514 of 2015 and Writ Petition No. 6146 of 2014
Mr. M.R. Andhale for Petitioner, Mr. D.V. Tele AGP for Respondent/State
Deelip S/o Harishchandra Jadhav
The State of Maharashtra, The Director of Technical Education, The Joint Director of Vocational Education, The Principal, Government Polytechnic College, Dhule, The Accountant General – II, (A & E), Maharashtra, Nagpur
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Writ petitions challenging orders denying pensionary benefits for a broken period of service.
Remedy Sought
Quashing of impugned judgment/order and direction to treat the period from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 as pensionable service by condoning the broken period.
Filing Reason
The petitioner's claim for pensionary benefits for the broken period was rejected by the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal and by respondent No.3.
Previous Decisions
Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad Bench, dismissed Original Application No. 1024/1999 on 04.09.2009; respondent No.3 passed order dated 03.04.2013 rejecting the claim.
Issues
Whether the period from 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 should be treated as pensionable service by condoning the broken period.
Submissions/Arguments
Petitioner argued that the break in service was not due to his fault and should be condoned for pensionary benefits.
Respondents opposed the petitions.
Ratio Decidendi
The broken period in service should be condoned for pensionary benefits when the break is not attributable to the employee's fault, and the period should be treated as pensionable service.
Judgment Excerpts
The impugned Judgment and Order dtd. 4.9.2009 passed by the Ld. Member of Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Aurangabad Bench Aurangabad in Original Application No. 1024/1999, may kindly be quashed and set aside and all the pensionary benefits may be given to the petitioner, by issuing writ against the respondents no.1 to 5, by treating the period 13.06.1965 to 29.06.1966 as pensionable period by condoning the broken period in service of the petitioner.
Procedural History
The petitioner filed Original Application No. 1024/1999 before the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, which was dismissed on 04.09.2009. Subsequently, the petitioner filed Writ Petition No. 514 of 2015 challenging that order. Meanwhile, respondent No.3 passed an order dated 03.04.2013 rejecting the claim, which was challenged in Writ Petition No. 6146 of 2014. Both petitions were heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.
Acts & Sections
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982:
