Skip to content


Shashikumar S/O Nagnathrao Dixit Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors. - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citation

Subject

Service

Court

Mumbai High Court

Decided On

Case Number

W.P. No. 2466 of 1996

Judge

Reported in

2005(3)MhLj521

Appellant

Shashikumar S/O Nagnathrao Dixit

Respondent

State of Maharashtra and ors.

Appellant Advocate

M.B. Sabnis, Adv.

Respondent Advocate

U.K. Patil, Assistant Government Pleader for respondents Nos. 1 and 3 and ;R.N. Borulkar, Adv. for respondent No. 4

Disposition

Petition allowed

Excerpt:


.....in sub-section (1) of section 34 of the 1996 act with slight modification. therefore, reference to the provisions of section 33 of the 1940 act in article 3 of schedule-i of the bombay court fees act has to be construed, in view of the provisions of section 8 of the general clauses act, as reference to the provisions of section 34 of the 1996 act. so far as an appeal filed under section 37 of the 1996 act is concerned, perusal of section 37 shows that an appeal is provided to the appellate court against an order setting aside an arbitral award or refusing to set aside an arbitral award under section 34. thus, as the provisions of article 3 of schedule-i do not apply to an application or petition filed under section 34 of the 1996 act, they will also not apply to the memorandum of appeal filed to set aside or modify an award made by the arbitrator under the 1996 act. in other words nothing contained in article 3 of schedule-i of the bombay court fees act applies to an application, petition or memorandum of appeal to set aside or modify any award made under the 1996 act as it does not apply to an application or petition or memorandum of appeal to set aside or modify an..........suffered on each count in the matter of promotion.8. the petition, therefore, must succeed and is allowed. the respondents are directed to grant deemed date of promotion to the post of the superintendent which was later on called as the post of registrar from 1-9-1992. the petitioner shall also be entitled to grant of all consequential benefits flowing from grant of above deemed date of promotion i.e. 1-9-1992. the exercise of granting deemed date of promotion and all consequential benefits shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and within a period of six months from the date of receipt of writ of this court. rule is made absolute in above terms. there shall, however, be no order as to costs.

Judgment:


V.G. Palshikar, J.

1. By this petition the petitioner seeks a declaration that he is entitled to a deemed date of promotion in the post of Registrar of the District Court as he had passed Lower Standard Departmental Examination earlier than the respondents No. 4 and 5 and in accordance with para 524 of the Civil Manual he was required to be considered as senior to them.

2. The petitioner was appointed as Junior Clerk on the establishment of the District Court, Osmanabad, on 1-4-1959, whereas, respondents No. 4 and 5 were appointed as Junior Clerk on 1-4-1959 and 1-2-1959, respectively. The petitioner passed the Lower Standard Departmental Examination (for short, 'Examination') in July, 1964, whereas, the respondents No. 4 and 5 passed the Examination in July, 1967 and July, 1971, respectively.

3. Thereafter, the petitioner passed the Higher Standard Departmental Examination in July, 1976, whereas, the respondents No. 4 and 5 passed the said examination in July, 1982 and 1983, respectively.

4. However, in spite of the provisions of Para 524 of the Civil Manual Vol.1, the learned District Judge, Osmanabad, committed an error in confirming the petitioner and the respondents No. 4 and 5 in the post of Junior Clerk from the dates of their appointments irrespective of the fact that the petitioner was successful in the Examination prior to the respondents No. 4 and 5. This error was carried further in the matter of promotions also. In spite of several representations of the petitioner, no correctional steps were taken with the result that the petitioner was denied promotion to the post of Registrar of the District Court or even the deemed date of promotion.

5. Error was committed at every stage of fixation of the seniority as the provisions of Para 524 of the Civil Manual were continuously misread. It is in these circumstances that the petitioner is before this Court seeking correction of his dates of promotion by granting deemed dates of promotion.

6. The petitioner retired from service on 28-2-1999 i.e. during the pendency of this petition. He, therefore, seeks a direction requiring the respondents to grant him the deemed date of promotion to the post of Registrar with effect from 1-9-1992 i.e. when he was entitled to be promoted to the post of Superintendent which later on was called Registrar.

7. The language of para 524 of the Civil Manual is clear and it reads :

'524. In the matter of promotions and confirmations, the District Judge should take into consideration the following principles. -- (1) All Clerks who pass the Lower Standard Departmental Examination should be confirmed immediately in the existing vacancies. Such confirmation should not be deferred till the passing of the said examination by their seniors.'

From the above provisions, it will be seen that the confirmation in the existing vacancy of a Clerk is dependant on his passing the Lower Standard Departmental Examination and it is from that date he should be confirmed. If the four persons were appointed on one date for examination i.e. on 1-7-1970 and due for confirmation sometimes in 1975 the seniority list of Junior Clerks to be maintained should show at serial No. 1 the Junior Clerk who has passed the examination first, followed by the second Junior Clerk who has passed the examination thereafter and so on. That being the correct manner of making the seniority list, error had crept in maintaining that list in the District Court of Osmanabad. The error was not corrected in spite of the request made by the petitioner. Ultimately, the petitioner suffered on each count in the matter of promotion.

8. The petition, therefore, must succeed and is allowed. The respondents are directed to grant deemed date of promotion to the post of the Superintendent which was later on called as the post of Registrar from 1-9-1992. The petitioner shall also be entitled to grant of all consequential benefits flowing from grant of above deemed date of promotion i.e. 1-9-1992. The exercise of granting deemed date of promotion and all consequential benefits shall be completed as expeditiously as possible and within a period of six months from the date of receipt of writ of this Court. Rule is made absolute in above terms. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //