1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD WRIT PETITIONS NO.8237,6840,8835,8872 & 9040 OF 2010 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders Court’s or Judge’s Orders Shri A.D.Shinde,Adv.for petitioners in W.P.Nos.8237,6840 & 9040/2010 Shri N.D.Sonawane,Adv.for petitioners in W.P.Nos.8835 & 8872/2010. Shri K.G.Patil,AGP for State Shri B.S.Mundhe,Adv.for R 2 to 5 in W.P.Nos. 8237 & 6840/10. Shri N.B.Suryawanshi,Adv.for Respondent- Zilla Parishad. ..... CORAM : B.R.GAVAI & A.A.SAYED,JJ DATE : 14/10/2010 1] By way of present petitions, though the petitioners have also prayed for a direction to the respondents to confer them the benefits of pay scale of a trained teacher, for the moment, petitioners are not pressing the said relief and seeking liberty to make a representation to the Zilla parishad for that purpose. The another 2 grievance of the petitioners is that though a higher pay scale was made applicable to the petitioners and the salary according to the said pay scale was paid to the petitioners, subsequently, the pay scale has been reduced and either the recovery is sought to be made from the pension/gratuity or recovery has already been made. It is a common contention of the petitioners that the higher pay which was paid to the petitioners was not paid to them on account of any act attributable to the petitioners ,recovery of the amount of higher pay scale is not permissible. 2] Similar issue had arisen before this Court in earlier round of litigations in W.P.Nos.3596/09 and 316/10, wherein such a recovery was held to be not permissible in law in view of the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Babulal Jain V/s State of M.P. and others reported in 2007 AIR SCW 2756. 3] Shri N.B.Suryawanshi,learned counsel for Zilla Parishad has placed on record 3 communication dated 11/10/2010 issued by the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad, Jalgaon. Vide the said communication, the C.E.O. has directed all the Block Education Officers in his district that since the recovery has been held to be bad in law by this Court, the amount paid on account of higher pay scale should not be recovered and whenever it is recovered, the same should be refunded to the employees concerned. 4] In that view of the matter, we find that the petition has served its purpose in so far as the impugned recovery is concerned. We accept the statement made in the communication of the C.E.O. Zilla Parishad on 11/10/2010 and dispose of the petitions in accordance with the same. 5] In so far as grievance of the petitioners for grant of higher pay scale is concerned, petitioners would be at liberty to approach the Zilla Parishad by way of representations and if such representations are made, the same would be decided in accordance with law 4 preferably within 3 months from the date of receipt of it. It is further made clear that in the event the decision of the Zilla Parishad on such representations goes adverse to the interest of the petitioners, the disposal of the present Writ Petitions would not come in the way of the petitioners in filing fresh Writ Petitions. [A.A.SAYEDJ.] [B.R.GAVAI,J.] umg/wp8237-10