1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.118 OF 2002 Dr.Arun Vinayak Sapre .....Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra and Ors. ..... Respondents Mr.Avinash Jalisatgi, for the petitioner. Mrs.Madhubala Kajale, A.G.P., for the State. CORAM :P.B.MAJMUDAR & R.M.SAVANT, JJ. DATE : JUNE 19, 2009 P.C. 1. The petitioner was appointed as a Senior Scientific Officer in the Science and Technology Cell (S & T Cell) of the Government of Maharashtra. The petitioner had joined the services in the year 1977 and after rendering 24 years of service, he continued in the same grade and he has not been given any promotional post by the Department. It is the grievance of the petitioner that no benefit of promotion or giving pay scale of a promotional post is given, as the Government has not framed any rules and regulation in this behalf. In this regard, the petitioner has made various representations to the State Government. 2 2. The petitioner had also approached Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in this behalf. The Tribunal however, was of the opinion that the incumbent cannot be given any relief in this behalf by asking the Government to create promotional post. But the Tribunal has expressed its view by holding that the Tribunal feels sorry and disturbed by the fact that such a highly qualified Scientific Officer has no avenue for promotion and stagnated on the post to which he was appointed. The Tribunal has expressed hope that the Government as an enlightened employer will consider this situation and find out some solution. However, ultimately the application preferred by the petitioner was rejected. 3. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the petitioner states that the petitioner has already retired from service since four years. The learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that except this particular post of Sr. Scientific Officer, promotional avenues are available for all other posts and only this post is left out. Considering the said aspect, the question as to whether petitioner can be given benefit of promotional post has now become academic and now this Court cannot ask the Government to create post retrospectively for promotion. We find substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that a person holding such an important post, if deprived of any benefit of promotion or incentives, naturally he would be frustrated. Even though, 3 the Tribunal has expressed its view, the Government has not done anything in this behalf. Since the petitioner has already retired from the services, now no relief can be given to the petitioner in this behalf. However, the State Government shall see to it that for the post in question, if promotional avenues or no promotional posts are there, the Government may try to see that for other incumbents holding said post, promotional avenues may be created or pay scale of promotional post, as the Government deem fit, may be made available. We have made the aforesaid observations in view of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of State of Tripura & Ors. V/s. K.K.Roy, 2004 AIR SCW 1. The State Government shall consider the observations made in the said judgment and may accordingly act in connection with the present post also. However, we make it clear that this aspect is entirely left with the Government and it is for the State Government to frame appropriate policy in this behalf which may be beneficial to the other incumbents. 4. Subject to what is stated above, the petition is disposed of. Rule is discharged. ( R.M.SAVANT, J. ) (P.B.MAJMUDAR, J.)