SHINDE BALASAHEB SONAJI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties, taken up for final hearing.

(2.) Heard learned Counsel for the parties, perused pleadings in the petition, annexures thereto, including copies of the communication received by the petitioner from the Office of the Accountant General, Nagpur, which are placed on record by the petitioner. Upon careful perusal of the letter written by the Deputy Accountant General and Public Information Officer dated 20th June, 2014 addressed to the petitioner, it is mentioned that, service period of the petitioner from 1st June, 1992 to 21st December, 2001 is required to be treated as break period and accordingly, employer of the petitioner was asked to submit reply / clarification in that respect. The relevant portion of the said letter reads, thus:

(3.) It appears that, the petitioner herein instituted Regular Civil Suit No. 155/93 and sought a declaration that the order of transfer is illegal and without authority. Upon perusal of the documents placed on record, it appears that, the said suit was decreed and being aggrieved, respondents preferred first appeal, which was allowed. Being aggrieved thereby, the petitioner preferred Second Appeal No. 408 of 1999 (Shri Balasaheb s/o Sonaji Shinde Vs. 1 St. Teresa Church, Harigaon, at Harigaon, Tq. Shrirampur and Ors.) The said second appeal was heard finally and decided on 21st December, 2001. The operative part of the said judgment reads, thus: