(1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY, AURANGABAD BENCH, AT AURANGABAD. WRIT PETITION NO. 259 OF 1994 1. Dattatraya Trambak Wani, 2. Vasant Shrikrushna Kalkar, 3. Sanjay Krishanrao Malkapurkar, 4. Arun Devidas Bhingare, 5. Liladhar Laxman Lohar, 6. Chandrakant Champalal Wani, 7. Babarao Wamanrao Ingale, 8. Minakshi Diliprao Nehete, 9. Prakash Uttam Mahale, 10. Rauf Gani Shaikh, 11. Sau. Jaishri Sanjayrao Malkapurkar, 12. Shri Manohar Satwa Pawar, 13. Prakash Namdeo Bhavasar, 14. Sanjay Rajaram Baviskar, 15. Pramod Ganpatrao Nagarkar, 16. Daut Gani Shaikh, 17. Harun Shabbir Patil, (2) 18. Chandrashekar Vimalnath Chatur, 19. Gulabrao Hilal Patil, 20. Satish Laxman Chaudhari, 21. Anil Suryakant Rane, 22. Pramod Motiram Kasar, 23. Prakash Pandit Shingane, 24. Devidas Vasant Bhavsar, 25. Vijay Manilal Khairnar, 26. Dattatraya Jugraj Sonar, 27. Rajendra Govind Bhakale, 28. Kum. Sunanda Dattaram Surve, 29. Pandurang Ramdas Shinde, 30. Sau. Vandana Ramchandra Neve, 31. Dilip Ramchandra Patil, 32. Pradip Pralhad Patinge, 33. Vishnu Chavdas Ingale, 34. Kalidas Pandurang Joshi, 35. Ku. Nirmala Sukhachand Pardeshi, 36. Sau. Kalpana Kalidas Joshi, 37. Vidhya Ramdas Gurao, (3) 38. Sau. Dipali Devendra Karkare, 39. Kum. Nirmala Vishwanath Jawale, Sau. Nirmala Girdhar Chaudhari, 40. Nitin Bhaurao Deshmukh, 41. Arun M. Sugandhiwale, 42. Sau. Mira Ravindra Bhagwat, 43. Kum. Sunita Purushottam Markande, 44. Kum. Shalini Ramdas Nehete, Sau. Shalini Pramod Kirange, 45. Manohar Vishwanath Kamlaskar, 46. Vilas Bhulakhi Dhande. All Major, Occupation : Service, All R/o. C/o. 70, Zilla Peth, Near Saibaba Mandir, Jalgaon. .. Petitioners. versus 1. The State of Maharashtra (Through Govt. Pleader, High Court Bench at Aurangabad). 2. Secretary, General Administration Department, Govt. of Maharashtra, Mantralaya, Bombay. (4) 3. Director of Languages, Directorate of Languages, State of Maharashtra, New Administrative Building, Opp. Mantralaya, Bombay. 4. The District Judge, Jalgaon. 5. The Registrar, High Court, Appellate Side, Bombay - 400 032. .. Respondents. ....................... Mr. M.K. Deshpande, Advocate, for the petitioners. Mrs. R.K. Ladda, Assistant Government Pleader, for respondent nos.1 to 5. ........................ CORAM : B.R. GAVAI & S.V. GANGAPURWALA, JJ. DATE : 17TH JUNE 2010 ORAL JUDGMENT (Per B.R. Gavai, J.) : 1. The petitioners have filed the present petition for direction to the respondents, to implement and give benefits of two advance increments or cash prize in lieu of these increments in accordance with the Government Resolutions dated (5) 16-6-1981, 12-8-1982, 11-11-1983 and 26-3-1985. 2. The petitioners were appointed as Junior Clerks in a period ranging between 1981 to 1986. It is the contention of the petitioners, that in accordance with the aforesaid Government Resolutions, the petitioners were entitled either to get two advance increments or cash prize in lieu thereof, on their successfully passing Marathi Typing examination. It is submitted that all the petitioners have passed the said examination and also done Marathi typing work. It is, therefore, submitted that the denial of benefit under the said Government Resolutions, on the basis of Circular dated 24th July 1991, is not permissible in law. 3. Mr. M.K. Deshpande, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners, submits that the petitioners, on the basis of the provisions made in the various Government Resolutions, that on passing Marathi Typing examination, they would be entitled to two advance increments or cash prize in lieu thereof, had appeared for the examination and passed the same. He, therefore, submits that it was not permissible on the part of the Government to resile from the stand taken by it and, as such, Circular dated 24th July 1991 was not sustainable in law. He further submits that in similar circumstances, advance increment was given to the employees working in Kolhapur District Court (6) and subsequently, on the basis of the Circular dated 24th July 1991, recovery was sought to be made of the amount paid on account of advance increment. The same was challenged before this court, by way of Writ Petition No. 6110/1996, and the Division Bench of this court by judgment and order dated 29th March 2007, has quashed and set aside the orders of recovery. 4. Mrs. R.K. Ladda, learned Assistant Government Pleader appearing for the respondents, on the contrary, submits that vide the Circular dated 24th July 1991, the Government had decided to give benefit of the advance increments / cash prize, only in so far as the employees who were recruited prior to 1993. She submits that all the petitioners are admittedly appointed after 1993 and, as such, they are not entitled to the benefit of the said scheme. 5. It appears that at the relevant time, since there was paucity of typists who had knowledge of Marathi, in order to encourage the employees to take training in Marathi typing, the Government had issued various Government Resolutions cited supra, thereby providing for incentive to such employees who had undertaken Marathi typing. The first Government Resolution, in that behalf, is dated 16th June 1981. Vide the said Government Resolution, such of the English Typists or Clerk doing the work of English typing, who had passed Marathi (7) typing test of 30 Words Per Minute, were entitled to cash prize of Rs. 125/-. Vide the Government Resolution dated 12th August 1982, the said incentive was increased from Rs. 125/- to, either two increments or cash prize of Rs. 500/-. However, it was clarified that higher pay fixation on account of two advance increments was not to be available to such employees at the last stage. 6. It appears that subsequently, vide Government Circular dated 24th July 1991, the said benefit has been withdrawn and restricted to the employees who were appointed prior to 11th November 1983. 7. The aforesaid Government Resolutions along with the Circular dated 24th July 1991 fell for consideration before Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 6110/1996. In the said case, the petitioners therein, who were appointed between 1983 to 1989, had passed the said examination and after passing the said examination, they were given the benefit of two advance increments and accordingly pay fixation was made. The Division Bench of this Court, in para 12 of the judgment, has observed thus : " As can be seen, the Civil Manual does not contemplate a post of Marathi typist, the (8) recruitment has been consistently done of clerks-cum-typists. The petitioners have rightly relied upon the advertisement issued by the Respondent No.4 in the year 1993 and by the learned District Judge, Pune, in the year 1996, calling for clerks knowing English typing and Marathi typing was optional. The petitioners relying upon the said resolutions dated 16-6-1981 and 12-8-1982 enrolled themselves for training for appearing at the Marathi typing examination and having passed the said examination, were given two increments and also amounts for outstanding works. Having dealt with issue of applicability of the said government resolution dated 11-11-1983 in the context of the Rules of 1991 made under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, we are of the view that the Respondents are now estopped from recovering the said two advance increments paid to the petitioners as also refixation of the petitioners pay on the said basis. " 8. It can thus be clearly seen from the aforesaid paragraph, that the petitioners in the said petition, relying on the (9) Government Resolutions dated 16-6-1981 and 12-8-1982, had enrolled themselves for training for Marathi Typing examination and had passed the said examination. It was, therefore, held that it was not permissible for the State to recover the said two advance increments paid to the petitioners therein and also refixation of the petitioners pay on the said basis. 9. The present petitioners are employees in the courts situated in Jalgaon district. We find that when the Division Bench of this court, in the identical set of facts, has found that the employees in the courts in Kolhapur district are eligible to the benefit of the aforesaid Government Resolutions, the petitioners cannot be denied the same. The petitioners, in the present case, relying on the aforesaid Government Resolutions, have undergone the training in Marathi typing and also have passed the requisite examination. In that view of the matter, we find that the petitioners also would be entitled to the benefit of either two advance increments or cash prize in lieu of two advance increments, on account of their passing the necessary Marathi typing examination. 10. It is not in dispute that all the petitioners have passed the requisite Marathi Typing examination. From the affidavit in reply, it can be seen that at times, the petitioners have also done the work of Marathi typing. In the circumstances, we are (10) inclined to allow the petition. 11. In the result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause "D". It is made clear that in the event, any of the petitioners opt for cash incentive, the same shall be paid within a period of six months from today, and in case of the petitions, who opt for two advance increments, the arrears on account of the same shall be paid and the necessary refixation of salary be done within a period of six months from today. There shall be no order as to costs. ( S.V. GANGAPURWALA ) ( B.R. GAVAI ) JUDGE JUDGE ......................... bgp/259wp