ttm 1 wp1499-97.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO.1499 OF 1997
Shri D.R.Bondre .. Petitioner
Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors. .. Respondents
Mr.P.P.Chavan for the petitioner
Mr.C.R.Sonawane, A.G.P. for respondent no.1 and 2
Mr.R.S.Khadapkar for respondent no.3
CORAM : D.B.BHOSALE & K.K. TATED, JJ.
DATE : 22nd NOVEMBER, 2011.
ORAL JUDGMENT (PER K.K.TATED, J):
1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.
2. By this petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of
India, petitioner challenges two circulars dated 14.06.1994 and 07.10.1994
issued by the Government of Maharashtra regarding the service conditions
of Librarians.
A few facts of the matter are as under:
3. The petitioner joined as Librarian with G.K.Gokhale College, Kolhapur
respondent no.4 with effect from 1st May, 1961 and worked for more than
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:56:25 :::
ttm 2 wp1499-97.doc
25 years as Librarian and retired from the same College. The pay scale of
Librarians and the Directors of Physical Education were on par with the
Lecturers. The revisions were effected during the year 1960-65. The
University Grant Commission appointed an independent committee to
recommend the scales of pay for Librarians and Directors of Physical
Education. Both the Committees unanimously recommended that the
Librarians and the Directors of Physical Education scales of pay ought to
have been on par with that of the Lecturers. The said situation continued
till 1975. Thereafter, the parity of pay scales between the
Librarians/Directors of Physical Education and the Lecturers was disturbed
and while the Lecturers were placed in the pay scale of Rs.700-1600
irrespective of their qualification and allowed 5-8 years to improve their
qualification and the Librarians/Directors of Physical Education were
placed in the pay scale of Rs.500-900, though in the most cases, they were
better qualified than the Lecturers. By circular dated 25.10.1977, the
respondents increased the qualifications of the Librarians retrospectively but
did not provide them time or facility to improve their qualifications. Later
on, the respondents issued circular, and thereby relaxed the qualifications
in respect of the Librarians appointed prior to the year 1975, but provided
that their services prior to the year 1973 would not be counted for any
purpose. Because of these circulars, the petitioner was getting less pay.
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:56:25 :::
ttm 3 wp1499-97.doc
They also affected his retirement benefits adversely. Therefore, the present
petition for getting equal pay on the basis of pay scale of Lecturers.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
being qualified under the Rules at the time of the petitioner’s appointment
cannot be said to be not qualified for higher pay scale vide circulars issued
by respondent nos.1 to 3 increasing eligibility/qualification with
retrospective effect. He further invited our attention to the orders dated
17th October, 2001 in Writ Petition No.988 of 1996 passed by Division Bench
consisting of Justice R.M.Lodha, (as he then was) and Smt.Justice Nishita
Mhatre, and 8th January, 2004 in Writ Petition No.733 of 1997 passed by
Division Bench consisting of Justice H.L.Gokhale (as he then was) and
Justice F.I.Rebello, (as he then was) and submit that the Writ Petition can
also be disposed of in terms of the said order.
5. The learned A.G.P. appearing for respondent nos.1 and 2 and counsel
appearing for respondent no.3 have no objection for disposing of this Writ
Petition in terms of the order dated 8.1.2004 in Writ Petition No.773 of
1997. In terms of the order dt.8.1.2004 passed in the Writ Petition No.773
of 1997, the following order is passed:
The petitioner would be entitled to be placed in the revised
scale of Rs.700-40-1100-60-1600 with effect from 1st April,
::: Downloaded on – 09/06/2013 17:56:25 :::
ttm 4 wp1499-97.doc
1980 and thereafter, from 1st April, 1986 in the revised pay
scale of 3700-125-4950-150-5700. The respondents are
directed to pay to the petitioner the back wages along with all
the consequential benefits after proper fitment within a period
of six months from today. In the event, the payment is not
made within six months from today, the petitioner would be
entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum from the date
of the judgment till the date of final payment.
6. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
(K.K. TATED, J.) (D.B. BHOSALE, J.)
::: Downloaded on - 09/06/2013 17:56:25 :::
