ARUN VALU TAMBEKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith and heard finally, by the consent of the Parties. The learned advocates representing the Respondent Zilla Parishad, Solapur agrees that the Petitioners are identically placed.

(2.) The Petitioners are the original employees who were working with the Respondent Zilla Parishad and superannuated from employment. All of them were subjected to recovery of amounts, purportedly for the reason that excess amounts were paid to them, under wrongful revised pay scales/erroneous revised pay scales, on the basis of acquiring the certificate of MS-CIT etc. These pay scales were revised more than a decade ago.

(3.) The grievance of these Petitioners is that recoveries have been initiated against them, from their retiral benefits/pensionary benefits. In some cases, amounts have already been recovered. A chart showing the details of the petitioners, their dates of superannuation, dates of impugned orders and amounts recovered from their retiral benefits/pensionary benefits, is as under:-