PRADEEP RANGRAO NALAWADE Vs. POONA COLLEGE OF PHARMACY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. The contesting Respondents have filed Affidavits in Reply. Heard by consent of parties. Rule is made returnable forthwith.

(2.) The Petitioner seeks directions to the Respondents to condone a gap in his service, which in turn entitles him to retirement benefits. He further seeks quashing of an Order dtd. 4/1/2022 passed by the 3rd Respondent rejecting his representation for condoning the gap in service as claimed by Respondents.

(3.) The Petitioner worked as an Assistant Professor in the 1st Respondent College of the 2nd Respondent University, till his superannuation. The 3rd Respondent is the Directorate of Technical Education of the 4th Respondent State of Maharashtra.