MADANLAL SHARAM Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this third round, the petitioner - a freedom fighter, has assailed the decision dated 15-11-2002, of the Maharashtra administrative Tribunal, Mumbai, in rejecting Miscellaneous Application no. 182 of 2002, as well as. Transfer Application No. 4. of 1996 (Writ Petition No. 941 of 1987 ).

(2.) ON obtaining graduation degree in Arts, the petitioner came to be appointed as Social Education Organizer in the Community Projects and national Extension Service Blocks, by order dated 12/07/1954 passed by the Secretary - Development Projects, Hyderabad State. He came to be absorbed under the new Bombay State with effect from 1-11-1956 consequent to the States Reorganization Act, 1956, as he was prior to the said date, working in the Marathwada Region of the erstwhile Hyderabad state and consequent to the Bombay Reorganization Act, 1960, he became an employee of the State of Maharashtra with effect from 1-5-1960. On formation of the Zilla Parishads pursuant to the Maharashtra Zilla i Parishads and Panchayat Samitis Act, 1961, he came to be deputed temporarily to the Zilla Parishad, Nanded, and was posted at Kinwat. As per the directions issued by the Divisional Commissioner, Aurangabad, he was deputed for training for the 7th Job Course of Social Education Organizers' Training Centre at Udaipur, held from 10-8-1963 and while he was on training, the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nanded, passed an order on 2-11-1963 and suspended the petitioner purportedly under rule 156 of the Bombay Civil Services. Rules, 1969, on the ground that the petitioner was found to be unsuitable as a trainee and had become a nuisance to the training centre. It was stated in the said order, that the petitioner would draw subsistence allowance at an amount equal to the leave on half average pay and, in addition, the dearness allowance admissible as per rule 151 of the Bombay Civil Services Rules, 1959 (For short, hereinafter referred to as "b. C. S. R. " ).

(3.) THERE was no further progress for initiating any departmental enquiry against the petitioner pursuant to the suspension order dated 2-11-1963 though the petitioner was recalled from the training centre and was transferred at Nanded, under the Panchayat Samiti. The training course was from 8/08/1963 till the end of December, 1963 and the said deputation for training was terminated by order dated 2/01/1964. By order dated 27/07/1964 he was directed not to leave the headquarter without prior permission of the Block Development Officer and on 2 4/08/1964, on his application, he was allowed to go to Kinwat. On 6/10/1964, he addressed a letter to the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla parishad. Nanded, from Hyderabad, and furnished his address there. He requested for payment of salary from 1-11-1962 to 1-11-1963 as it was not paid to him and the payment of subsistence allowance from 2-11-1963 onwards. He also stated in the said letter, that while leaving headquarter on 24/08/1964, he had furnished the temporary address as C/o. G. P. O. , Hyderabad, and the said was required to be noted as per the new address furnished therein copy of this letter was also addressed to the block Development Officer, Panchayat samiti, Nanded, and submitted under certificate of posting. The petitioner went on making representations for subsistence allowance from time to time and nothing further was done in that regard by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, nanded.