LAWS(BOM)-2022-11-87

JITENDRAKUMAR KRISHNARAO LANJEWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Decided On November 30, 2022
Jitendrakumar Krishnarao Lanjewar Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) By the instant petition, the petitioners are challenging the legality and validity of the Government Resolution dtd. 29/11/2010 issued by the respondent no.1 -State Government, inter alia taking away the rights of the petitioners of all the pensionary benefits applicable to them as per the old pension scheme and started applying the new D.C.P.S. Pension Scheme, in spite of the fact that the appointment of the petitioners were made prior to the year 2005.

(3.) According to the petitioners, they are appointed as a Junior College Lecturers. The petitioner nos.1 and 2 were appointed in respondent no.4-College on sanctioned posts as Junior College Lecturers on probation for the period of two years vide appointment order dtd. 30/12/1999 and 27/12/1999, which was prior to the year 2005. Likewise the petitioner nos.3 to 5 were also appointed by following the due, procedure of law against the clear and sanctioned posts of Junior College Lecturers on probation for the period of two years, vide appointment order dtd. 1/10/2000 and 26/9/2005 issued by the respondent no.4. Thus, it makes clear that the petitioner nos.3 to 5 were appointed prior to 1/11/2005. The appointments of the petitioners were made by following the due procedure and further the said school was started getting grant-in-aid, though it is mentioned by the petitioners in the body of petition it is not there, since when they school started getting aid, it is therefore not clear and, therefore, the Education Officer required to verify whether the school was getting 100% grant and since when. The respondent no.4 sent the proposal of the petitioners to the respondent no.2 for grant of its approval and the said appointments of the petitioner nos.1 and 2 were duly approved by the respondent no.2 initially on probation for the period of two years and, thereafter, on regular and permanent basis on 30/10/2001 to petitioner nos.1 to 3 and 8/12/2010 to petitioner nos.4 and 5.