THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. KUBER GOVINDRAO MORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AS per the Administrative order dated 9th September, 2015 passed by the Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice, this Petition has been specially assigned to this Bench. Heard the learned AGP appearing for the Petitioner and the Respondent appearing in person. As per the request made by the Respondent appearing in person, we have permitted him to make submissions in Marathi language. We have also perused the written submissions made by him.

(2.) THE Respondent was in the service of the State Government. On 15th November, 2011, the Joint Director of Vocational Education and Training exercised powers under clause (b) of Sub -Rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982 (for short "Pension Rules") and by his order informed the Respondent that on completion of the notice period of three months i.e. with effect from 16th February, 2012, the Respondent shall stand compulsorily retired from the Government service. The Respondent approached the Commissioner appointed under Sub -Section (1) of Section 60 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (for short "the Disabilities Act") by invoking his jurisdiction under Section 62 of the Disabilities Act. By order dated 5th December, 2011 the operation of order /notice dated 15th November, 2011 was stayed by the Commissioner. By final order dated 24th January, 2014 the the Commissioner vacated the order of stay dated 5th December, 2011 and directed the Joint Director to take appropriate decision in accordance with law after sympathetically considering the case of the Respondent. Further order was made on 3rd February, 2014 by the Joint Director under which it was directed that with effect from 3rd February 2014 the Respondent shall stand compulsorily retired.

(3.) THE learned AGP invited our attention to the provisions of the Disabilities Act and in particular Sections 61 and 62 thereof. His submission is that the Commissioner appointed under Sub -Section (1) of Section 60 had no power or jurisdiction to entertain a complaint against an order of compulsory retirement as well as to set aside the said order by directing reinstatement of the Respondent.