1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO.987 OF 2002 01. The State of Maharashtra, through: 02. The Secretary, Finance Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 03. The Secretary, Irrigation Department, Government of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Mumbai. 04. The Superintendent Engineer, Trimbak road, Nashik. 05. The Collector, Ahmednagar, District : Ahmednagar. 06. The Executive Engineer, Mula Irrigation Department, Ahmednagar (Godavari Khore Petitioners/ Mahamandal) orig. Resps. versus 01. Deoram Barku Bachkar, Age 44 years, occup.service, r/of Pimpri (A), Tq.Rahuri, District Ahmednagar. 02. Gangaram Gujaba Aynar, age 43 years, occupation service, r/of Amalner, Taluka Newasa, District Ahmednagar. 03. Anil Sadashiv Pawle, age 32 years, occup.service, r/of Shramik Nagar, Bhiranbag, Savedi, Tq. & Dist.Ahmednagar. Respondents/ ori.applicants ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri S.K.kadam, Asstt. Government Pleader, for the petitioners. Respondents absent, although served. ---------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Coram : S.B. Deshmukh, and Shrihari P.Davare,J. Date : 29th September 2010. Oral Judgment (Per: Deshmukh, J.) 01. We have heard Shri S.K.Kadam, learned Assistant Government Pleader, for the petitioners. 02. This writ petition was on board on March 13, 2002. On that day, rule had been issued with interim relief in terms of prayer clause (C). Rule has been served on the Respondents. However, none appears for them, despite service. 03. Respondents herein had filed Original Application No.188 of 1999 before the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, Bench at Aurangabad (for brevity's sake "MAT"). It is the contention of the Respondents that they are permanent government employees and thus eligible and entitled as well, for bonus and other benefits as per the government policy and decisions. It is also claimed by the Respondents that other persons working as Mustering Assistants under the Public Works Department, in other Divisions or Circles, have been given bonus. Such claim of the Respondents for bonus, however, had been denied by the Government and thus they have been deprived of the bonus and other ancillary benefits. The 3 Respondents-Original Applicants have claimed such benefits on the basis of the Government Resolution dated 13.10.1992, as well as orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.4703 of 1993 (State of Maharashtra vs. Munaf and others). 04. With the assistance of learned A.G.P. Shri S.K.Kadam, we have perused the order passed by learned MAT, Aurangabad, in Misc. Application No.34 of 1999 in Original Application No.188 of 1999, on 23.7.1999 (Exhibit B at page 67 of the Writ Petition). The said M.A. No.34 of 1999 appears to have been filed by present Respondent No.1 Deoram Bachkar for some other purpose. Learned A.G.P. Shri S.K.Kadam points out that the said M.A. No.34 of 1999 is not relevant for the purpose of consideration of present writ petition. It appears from the said order that the learned MAT, Aurangabad, has referred to the Government Resolution dated 13.10.1992 and the order passed in C.A. No.198 of 1993 which has been affirmed by the Supreme Court in S.L.P. No. 4703 of 1993. Learned MAT was of the opinion that the order passed in C.A. No.198 of 1993 squarely applies to the case of the applicants in O.A. No.188 of 1999 and, therefore, it directed the govt. authorities-respondents therein (petitioners herein) to scrutinize the case of each applicants in the light of Government Resolution dated 13.10.1992. 4 05. Shri S.K.Kadam, learned A.G.P., points out the Government Resolution dated 1.12.1995, a copy of which is placed on record (page 78). It appears from this Government Resolution that the issue of Mustering Assistants was under consideration for substantial period of time. Their services, according to the Government, were not necessary. In the said Govt. Resolution dated 1.12.1995, various policy decisions/Government Resolutions, right from the Govt. Resolution dated 26.5.1993 till 18.7.1995, have been referred to. Learned A.G.P. Shri Kadam took us through the said Government Resolution dated 1.12.1995, and particularly clause 5.2 thereof (page 85 of compilation) which is relevant for the purpose of consideration of this writ petition. The said clause 5.2 makes a mention that the Mustering Assistants working with the State Government are entitled only to the salary. In other words, apart from salary, Mustering Assistants are not entitled to any other benefits/concessions for the reason that they are not government employees in letter and spirit. According to learned Asstt.Govt.Pleader, this clause 5.2 of the said Govt.Resolution clearly resolves the issue of bonus and makes it clear that the Mustering Assistants are not entitled to bonus. 06. In view of the directions given by learned MAT, Aurangabad, in Original Application No.188 of 1999 vide order 5 dated 23.7.1999, the State Government has scrutinized the cases of the Mustering Assistants. In view of the Govt. Resolution dated 1.12.1995, according to learned A.G.P. Shri Kadam, present respondents-applicants in said O.A. No. 188/1999 are not eligible and thus entitled for bonus and the decision to that effect was taken by the Government and the same was informed to the respondents herein, by the Deputy Executive Engineer, Mula Irrigation Department, Ahmednagar, vide communication dated 27.9.1999.(pg.73 of compilation). It was informed to present respondents that apart from salary, they were not entitled to other benefits which are being received by the regular government employees. So far as issue of bonus is concerned, the last sentence of this communication is categorical to the effect that the Respondents herein are not entitled to bonus. 07. After receipt of communication dated 27.9.1999, present respondents appear to have filed Contempt Petition No.38 of 1999 in Original Application No.188 of 1999 before learned MAT, Aurangabad. At Exhibit "E" (compilation page 94), is the copy of the order passed by the learned MAT, Aurangabad, in the said Contempt Petition. The said order appears to have been passed on 22.8.2000. The learned MAT, Aurangabad, has noticed that the amount of bonus to the tune of Rs.23,259/= for the period 1995-96 to 1998-99, payable to present respondents-contempt petitioners, was not paid to 6 them by the present petitioners-authorities of the Govt. for want of funds. The learned MAT, Aurangabad has observed that the local authorities (probably, present writ petitioners) have submitted necessary proposal for according sanction and also funds. Ultimately, the respondents to the contempt petition (present petitioners) were directed to make special efforts to get sanction from the State Government in respect of this proposal and obtain the funds and disburse the same to the concerned petitioners within a period of three months from the date of said order dated 22.8.2000. It is this direction of the learned MAT, Aurangabad, issued in Contempt Petition No.38/1999 which is sought to be challenged before this Court by present writ petition filed under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India. 08. Two-fold submissions are advanced on behalf of the petitioners. Firstly, the State Government, in view of the order passed by the Supreme Court, has examined the cases of the Mustering Assistants within the parameters of the Government Resolution dated 1.12.1995 and reached to a conclusion that they are not eligible for bonus. To substantiate the submission, Shri S.K.kadam, learned A.G.P., points out the order dated 2.12.1996 passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.5339 of 1996, a copy of which is at page 88 of the compilation. We have noticed from this order that the State of Maharashtra was the petitioner and one 7 Subhash Narayan Ahirrao was the respondent who is not respondent to the case on hand. This order of the Hon'ble Apex Court makes a reference to the order passed by the High Court on 22.3.1991. From this order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, it appears that the Government Resolution dated 1.12.1995, which laid down scheme for absorption into the regular service, was placed before the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the scheme laid down thereunder was approved of by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The exact approval of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reads thus: "................................................. We have approved the scheme and we direct that all the employees who fall within the parameters of the scheme should be similarly treated so that the possibility of individuals coming for redress under the scheme may not arise as that would only create avoidable litigation." 09. The Mustering Assistants working across the State indisputably have approached this Court and, in turn, the matters had reached to the Supreme Court. It appears from the record that, by Govt. Resolution dated 1.12.1995, the Govt. of Maharashtra has taken a policy decision in relation to the issue of Mustering Assistants. In our opinion, the said Government Resolution holds the field which has been approved by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. We have referred to clause 5.2 of the said Govt. Resolution dated 1.12.1995, in foregoing paragraphs. 8 10. Shri Kadam, learned A.G.P. fairly points out the order dated 1.10.1995 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, which is on record at page 66. It appears that Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 4703 of 1993 (State of Maharashtra vs. Munaf and ors) was filed against the judgment and order of the MAT, dated 6.6.1996 in R.P. No.237/94 in O.A. No.1083/1993. By the said order dated 1.10.1995, the Hon'ble Apex Court condoned the delay, and dismissed the S.L.P. This is relevant for the purpose that the order of the Supreme Court has been referred to by the learned MAT, Aurangabad in its order dated 23.7.1999 passed in M.A. No.34 of 1999 in O.A. No.188 of 1999 (Exhibit B at page 67 of compilation). It appears that there was some confusion before the learned MAT. However, we have examined all the papers which are made available to us. We are of the opinion that the Govt. Resolution dated 1.12.1995 has been approved of, by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal which we have referred to in foregoing paragraphs. In view of the Government Resolution dated 1.12.1995, submission of the learned A.G.P. that the Respondents herein are not eligible or entitled to bonus, they being Mustering Assistants and not permanent government servants, deserves acceptance. 11. Apart from above, the jurisdiction vested with the learned MAT to consider the grievance of the civil servants and pass appropriate orders, is one part of the matter. In 9 contempt jurisdiction, the contemnor can be punished in accordance with the provisions of the law, however, there is no question of further directions. In our opinion, the respondents-original applicants are not eligible or entitled for bonus, in view of the facts and circumstances which are brought on record and secondly, the order issued in a contempt jurisdiction cannot countenance the question of grant of bonus or issue before this court. 12. In our opinion, petition deserves to be allowed by quashing and setting aside the order passed by the learned MAT, Aurangabad, in Contempt Petition No.38 of 1999, dated 22.8.2000. 13. Accordingly, Writ Petition is allowed. The order dated 22.8.2000 passed by the learned MAT, Aurangabad, in Contempt Petition No.38 of 1999 is hereby quashed and set aside. Rule made absolute in above terms. (SHRIHARI P. DAVARE, J.) (S.B.DESHMUKH, J.) pnd/wp982.02