SUNIL SHANKARRAO PARLIKAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties and the learned A.G.P., heard finally.

(2.) All these petitions are decided by this common judgment since the issue of law and facts arise therein are common.

(3.) Mr.V.D.Sapkal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, would submit that the petitioners were initially serving on daily wages with the Zilla Parishad, Aurangabad. The petitioners were taken on C.R.T. (Converted Regular Temporary) Establishment on various dates in the cadre of Mistri Grade-1 and Mistri Grade-II. Vide Government Resolution dated 20.05.1999, all these cadres were amalgamated in one cadre of Civil Engineering Assistant. Certain posts of the cadre of Civil Engineering Assistant were created vide the very Government Resolution. The petitioners and others were absorbed in cadre of Civil Engineering Assistant in phased manner. The petitioners were expected to pass professional examination for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. There was exemption for employees to pass such professional examination only on their attaining age of 45 years. The Government issued resolution on 08.06.1995 for implementation of Assured Career Progress Scheme ("A.C.P.S.", for short) or grant of Time Bound Promotion ("T.B.P.", for short) Scale with effect from 15.10.1994 for Class-3 and Class-4 employees. According to learned counsel, the petitioners, on their completion of twelve years' continuous service since the dates on which they were brought on C.R.T. Establishment, became eligible for first benefit of A.C.P.S./T.B.P. Scale. The petitioners, however, had not cleared professional examination. All of them got exemption from passing the said Examination on attaining age of 45 years. Thereafter, the Zilla Parishad issued orders granting them first benefit of A.C.P.S./T.B.P scale. According to the learned counsel, the petitioners were granted the said benefit from the date of completion of their twelve years of service. The Government, however, by its order dated 28.07.2014, issued certain directions, for implementation of which the salaries of the petitioners were sought to be re-fixed besides recovery of excess payment of the salaries.