1 W.P. No.11663 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD Writ Petition No.11663 of 2010 * Smt. Radhabai Parmeshwar Hambir ) Deceased, ) through legal representatives: ) ) 1) Parmeshwar Kisan Hambir, ) Age 68 years, ) Occupation: Pensioner, ) R/o Jaibhimnagar, Town Hall, ) Near Saleem Kirana Stores, ) III Lane, Aurangabad. ) ) 2) Nandkishor Parmeshwar Hambir, ) Age 45 years, ) Occupation : Service, ) R/o As above. ) ) 3) Vijay Parmeshwar Hambir, ) Age 40 years, ) Occupation: Service, ) R/o As above. ) ) 4) Sanjay Parmeshwar Hambir, ) Age 35 years, ) Occupation : Service, ) R/o As above. ) ) 5) Vishal Parmeshwar Hambir, ) Age 25 years, ) Occupation : Service, ) R/o As above. ) ) Petitioners. 6) Rukinabai w/o Bhimrao Kakade, ) D/o Parmeshwar Hambir, ) Age 22 years, ) Occupation : Household, ) R/o As above. ) Versus 2 W.P. No.11663 of 2010 1) The State of Maharashtra, ) Through Secretary, ) Public Health Services, ) Mantralaya, Mumbai – 32. ) ) 2) The Dean, ) Government Medical College ) Respondents & Hospital, Ghati, Aurangabad. ) ) 3) The Accountant General (A& E)-II, ) Maharashtra State, Nagpur. ) -------- Smt. A.N. Ansari, Advocate, for the petitioners. Shri. V.B. Ghatge, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent Nos.1 to 3. -------- CORAM: NARESH H PATIL & T.V. NALAWADE, JJ. DATE : 17th DECEMBER 2011 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per Naresh H Patil, J.): 1) Heard. 2) Rule, rule made returnable forthwith by consent. Heard finally. 3) This petition is prosecuted by the legal representatives of petitioner - deceased Radhabai Parmeshwar Hambir. It is the contention of the petitioners that Radhabai was serving as Class IV employee on temporary basis in Government Medical College and Hospital Aurangabad - respondent No.2. In the year 1999 the petitioner was 3 W.P. No.11663 of 2010 appointed for a period of 29 days. It is the case of the petitioners that deceased petitioner - Radhabai was absorbed in service in July 1999. The petitioner retired on 28-2-2009. 4) The petitioners' contention is that for claiming pension the petitioner's services are calculated which come to 9 years, 6 months and 2 days which is short of ten years. Under Rule 110(2)(b) of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules 1982 (hereinafter referred to as "the Rules of 1982") an employee ought to have completed ten years service for claiming pension. 5) Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in view of sub rule (3) of Rule 110 of the Rules of 1982 the petitioner could be entitled for claiming pension. Sub rule (3) of Rule 110 of the Rules of 1982 reads as under : “110. Amount of pension : (1) ............ (2) ............ (3) In calculating the length of qualifying service, fraction of a year equal to three months and above shall be treated as a completed one-half year and reckoned as qualifying service. 4 W.P. No.11663 of 2010 6) The learned counsel places reliance on the service book extract of the petitioner and the relevant provisions of the Rules of 1982. 7) Learned Assistant Government Pleader Shri. Ghatge submits that the petitioner is not entitled for pension as she did not complete 10 years of service for claiming pension. The Assistant Government Pleader places reliance on the affidavit-in-reply filed by Medical Officer, office of the Dean, Government Medical College and Hospital, Aurangabad. 8) We have perused the documents placed on record, the relevant provisions of the Rules of 1982 and the judgment cited before us. 9) In the facts of the case we are of the view that the State Government is entitled to consider this case under its powers conferred under Rule 54 and in the light of the provisions of Rule 110(3) of the Rules of 1982. We, therefore, direct the State Government to pass appropriate orders as to whether the petitioner could be conferred the benefits of the provisions of Rule 110(3) read with Rule 54 of the Rules of 1982 for getting pension. 5 W.P. No.11663 of 2010 10) Deceased Radhabai Hambir died on 22nd August 2011. Learned counsel for the petitioners, therefore, requests that the State should pass appropriate orders in accordance with the provisions of law and the policy adopted by the State at the earliest with regard to the pension benefits only. We, therefore, direct the State Government to consider the case of the petitioner for the purpose of grant of pension under the relevant rules and in the light of observations made by us as above. The State Government shall pass appropriate orders and communicate the same to the petitioners within a period of four months from the receipt of copy of this order. 11) Rule is made absolute in the above terms. Sd/- Sd/- (T.V. NALAWADE, J.) (NARESH H PATIL, J.) rsl