SHIVAPPA BHUJANGAPPA BEMBALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner Shivappa s/o Bhujangappa Bembale has filed present Writ Petition against Zilla Parishad through its Chief Executive officer and requested for direction to regularise his services as a Peon w. e. f. 24-7-1970; further direction is sought to regularise his services as Peon w. e. f. 1973. Petitioner also claimed arrears; and, thereafter, by amending petition on 12-9-1995, claimed relief to grant pension.

(2.) The gist of the contention of the petitioner that he is resident of bardapur, Tq. Ambajogai, District Beed. It is further claimed that he was working as part time Peon in a Primary Girls School at Bardapur since 1-8-1970. He worked as part time Peon till 10-7-1990. The said school is run by Zilla parishad, Beed. It is further claimed that he was thereafter appointed and taken in regular cadre as Peon in the pay scale of Rs. 750-12-870-DR-14-940 by order dated 6-7th July, 1990 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad. Beed. The petitioner was, accordingly, posted as Peon in the Primary Girls school, Hatola, Taluka Ambajogai and he worked there till 30-4-1993, however, as he completed 60 years of age on 30-4-1993, he was relieved from service w. e. f. 30-4-1993. It is further submitted that as a matter of fact the services of petitioner ought to have been regularised in the year 1973 itself and should have taken in regular cadre. However, he was continued to serve part time till 1990. It is further contended that some other persons were taken on regular cadre. It is also submitted that by paying meagre amount of Rs. 2,322/- the petitioner is retired from service on 30-4-1993. According to him, the service record of petitioner is clean and unblemished; even, he continued in service from 1-8-1970 till 30-4-1993; and considering the said period he is entitled for pensionary benefits. It is submitted that the petitioner is unnecessarily discriminated. A request is accordingly made to direct the respondent Zilla Parishad to consider his claim for pensionary benefits.

(3.) In the petition we heard Mr. Vivek Dhage, Advocate for petitioner; Mr. U. K. Patil, AGP for respondent No. 1 - State; and Mr. C. V. Thombre, Advocate for respondent No. 2 - Zilla Parishad, Beed, at length. We have also gone through the affidavit-in-reply filed on behalf of Zilla Parishad and the letter dated 1-3-1994 and 14-7-1994.