1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITION NO. 6223 OF 2009 Shri Ashok Kachru Bhamare age adult, occ. service r/o c/o 8, Deshmukh Housing Society Near Chavan Colony, Tulshiram Nagar Deopur, Dhule .. PETITIONER ( Petitioner nos. 1 to 15 and 17 to 52 are deleted vide order dt. 12-11-2009 in Civil Application no. 11492/2009 ) VERSUS Dhule District Co-operative Agriculture & Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd. Dhule. .. RESPONDENT Mr. Amol S. Sawant, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.A. More, Advocate for the respondent. ===== CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 12 th November, 2009 ORAL JUDGMENT : 1 Heard. 2 2 Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal at admission stage. 3 Petition relates to disbursement of monetary benefits payable to the employees towards additional dearness allowance, leave encashment and leave fare concession. It is pointed out that the monetary benefits have already been disbursed to all the employees including 51 petitioners who were initially added in the petition. However, while disbursing the monetary benefits to the employees, only petitioner no.16 is left out of consideration. Respondent relies upon the circular issued by the Commissioner for Cooperation & Registrar, Maharashtra State, Pune dt. 26-6-2009 whereby it has been directed that in terms of the order issued by the Apex court on 24-4-2009, the benefits are required to be disbursed to the employees working in bank on 1-4-2002. It is stated that the petitioner herein did not fulfill the requirements laid down under the circular and as such he is not entitled to the benefits. Order passed by the Apex court in Spl. Leave Petition no. 9068/2009 decided on 24-4-2009 is made available 3 for perusal. Order passed by the Apex court does not lay down any distinction so far as the members of the employees’ association who are in service on the particular date or have already retired on superannuation. Contents of the circular issued by the Commissioner for cooperation & Registrar, appear to be out of context. Even otherwise, petitioner alone cannot be left out for consideration for depriving the financial benefits accruable to him. Respondent cannot be permitted to make any discrimination in this manner between the employees who are similarly situate. Petitioner places reliance on a judgment delivered by this court in the manner of Bhagwan Sudam Patil vs. Dhule District Co-operative Agriculture & Rural Multipurpose Development Bank Ltd. in Writ Petition no. 1730/2008 decided on 6-7-2009 whereby this court directed payment of monetary benefits to the employees who were similarly situate. Considering all the relevant circumstances, I am of the opinion that the petition presented by the petitioner needs to be allowed and the same is accordingly allowed. Petitioner shall be paid monetary benefits alongwith the other employees and without unreasonable 4 delay. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause ‘A’. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb/office/wp6223.09.odt 5 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO.__________ IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, BENCH AT AURANGBAD. CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11492 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 6223 OF 2009 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of | Coram, appearances, Court’s orders | Court’s or Judge’s orders or directions and Registrar/s orders | and Registrar’s orders | CORAM : R. M. BORDE, J. DATE : 12 th November, 2009 . Petitioners / applicants seek leave to delete names of petitioner nos. 1 to 15 and 17 to 52 from the array of petitioners. Learned counsel for the contesting respondents does not have any objection for deletion of the names. Application is thus allowed in terms of prayer clause ‘A’. ( R. M. BORDE, J.) dyb / office /wp6223.09.odt 6