 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO: 968/2009 Ku Shital Raghunath Sarjare vs. State of Maharashtra and others ) -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memorandum of Coram Court's or Judges Order appearances, Court's orders of directions & Registrar's orders. ................................................................................................................................... CORAM: D.D.SINHA & A. P. BHANGALE , JJ. DATED: 04th March, 2009. *** 1. Heard Shri G N Khanzode, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr S J Jichkar, learned Assistant Government Pleader for Respondents. 2. In the present petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the Respondents to extend all the benefits in view of Rule 26 of the MEPS Rules, 1981 since the petitioner is absorbed with effect from 1st February,1998 in Respondent no.4-School. 3. Learned AGP has brought to our notice the communication dated 4.12.2008 issued by the management to the petitioner and clauses 3,4 and 5 of the said communication, read thus: “03. The Education Officer, Z.P. Bhandara by his order dated 20.01.1997 has directed to absorb Ku.Shital Sarjare in Rashtriya Madhyamik Vidyalaya, Dongargaon, Tah.Gondia Dist. Gondia. 04. She was absorbed in the school with effect from 01.02.199 and  she is being paid her salary regularly. 05. However the matter of her increments was referred to the Dy. Director of Education Nagpur now it is learnt that some direction in this regard are issued to the Education Officer Z.P. Gondia recently. The School and the Society will take necessary action with regard to her increments.” 4. A plain reading of the above-referred paragraphs would show that regular salary of the petitioner is being paid with effect from 1.2.1998 and it appears that the Deputy Director of Education, Nagpur issued some directions in respect of claim of the petitioner for grant of increments. In the circumstances, we dispose of the petition with liberty to the petitioner to canvass her grievance if not addressed by the authorities, to the competent Authority. If such a representation is made, we expect the Competent Authority to decide the same, within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of such representation, if any. Steno copy allowed. JUDGE JUDGE sahare