SHESHRAO @ SHEKHAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issue we are tasked to resolve is, whether the petitioner is entitled to draw pension.

(2.) Resolving the aforesaid issue would require noticing the basic facts giving rise to this writ petition.

(3.) The petitioner, born on 12th October, 1952, joined the Maharashtra Judicial Service as a Civil Judge (Junior Division) on 3rd December, 1990. In his fifth year of judicial service, the petitioner was appointed as an Assistant Legal Advisor-cum-Under Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Law and Judiciary Department on 12 th December, 1994. Having continued on such post for over seven and a half years, the petitioner had applied for and was selected for appointment as President of the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (hereafter "the District Forum"). Consequent to issuance of Government Resolution dated 13th May, 2002, by which the petitioner was appointed as President of the District Forum, he had by his letter dated 5th June, 2002 requested the Principal Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Law and Judiciary Department to relieve him from service retaining his lien on the post of Assistant Legal Advisor. By an order dated 31st July, 2002, the petitioner was relieved from the 4 wp2413.17.odt post of Assistant Legal Advisor without anything being said in respect of retention/suspension/termination of lien. Consequent to such relieving order, the petitioner joined as President of the District Forum on 1st August, 2002. The Government Resolution dated 13th May, 2002, inter alia, stipulated that the petitioner shall be on probation for a year and upon confirmation, shall continue as such President for a further period of four years or until he attains the age of 65 years, whichever is earlier. The petitioner continued successfully as President of the District Forum for the first term, which ended on 31 st July, 2007. This is evident from the fact that he was offered appointment for a second term, which he accepted without demur. The appointment order dated 2nd July, 2007 stipulated that the petitioner shall continue on the post of President of the District Forum for a period of five years or until he attains 65 years of age, whichever is earlier, and in furtherance thereof he discharged the duty of President of the District Forum till 31st October, 2012, i.e., the last day of the month in which he attained the age of 60 years. If indeed the petitioner had continued in Judicial Service, he 5 wp2413.17.odt would have retired on 31st October, 2010, on attaining the age of superannuation of 58 years. A few months prior thereto, 21st June, 2010 to be precise, the petitioner addressed a letter to the Principal Secretary to the Government of Maharashtra, Law and Judiciary Department. While informing that he was due to retire on 31 st October, 2010, the petitioner requested for release of retiral benefits in his favour. However, at no point of time prior to 31 st October, 2010 did the petitioner express his intention to revert to the Law and Judiciary Department.