Bombay High Court
KIRAN MANILAL CHAUDHARI AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ORS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the pending representation must be decided in accordance with the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, its 2022 amendment, the 2024 Government Resolution and the 2019 Government Notification, and a reasoned order must be issued within 60 days.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the fixation of their one‑step pay scale (Ekstar) on the ground that it was not in accordance with the recommendations of the 6th and 7th Pay Commissions. They had submitted a detailed representation on 5 March 2026 to the concerned authority, which remained pending. The Court noted a prior judgment dated 17 February 2022 in Vinod Lahu Patil v. State of Maharashtra, which dealt with a similar issue. It held that the representation must be examined in light of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, the amendment rules of 2022, the Government Resolution of 29 February 2024 and the Government Notification of 30 January 2019. Accordingly, Respondent No. 5 was directed to consider the representation and pass a reasoned order within 60 days. The writ petition was disposed of on these terms.
Issues considered
- Whether the fixation of the petitioners' one‑step pay scale (Ekstar) is contrary to the 6th and 7th Pay Commission recommendations.
- Whether the authority is obligated to consider the petitioners' representation under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules and the subsequent notifications and resolutions.
Subjects
- pay fixation
- Ekstar
- 6th Pay Commission
- 7th Pay Commission
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules
- writ petition
- government resolution
- representation
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42033-FB
{1} wp11921-26.doc
drp
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO.11921 OF 2026
Kiran Manilal Chaudhari and Others PETITIONERS
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra and Others RESPONDENTS
.......
Mr. Estling S. Murge, Advocate for the Petitioners
Mr. S. K. Tambe, AGP for Respondent - State
....…
[CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, &
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. J.]
DATE : 10th SEPTEMBER, 2026
ORDER :
1. The Petitioners are aggrieved, as according to them, their
pay fixation of one step pay scale (Ekstar) in accordance with
the 6th and 7th Pay Commission recommendations, has been
wrongly done. The Petitioners have made a detailed
representation on 5th March, 2026 addressed to Respondent –
Authorities, which is still pending and no decision is taken by the
said authority. It is pointed out that in identical set of
circumstances, this Court has earlier passed an order dated 17 th
February, 2022 in Writ Petition No. 2304 of 2022 ( Vinod Lahu
Patil V/s The State of Maharashtra and Others).
{2} wp11921-26.doc
2. We have heard learned Advocate for the Petitioners and
learned AGP.
3. An innocuous prayer is put forth by the Petitioners. As
such, the Writ Petition is disposed of by directing Respondent No.
5 to consider the representation of the Petitioners dated 5 th
March, 2026 in the light of the grounds set out by them, strictly
in accordance with law and by taking into consideration the
notification dated 22nd April, 2009 incorporated in the
Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and the
notification dated 3rd February, 2023 incorporated in the
Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) (Amendment) Rules,
2022 and in the light of the Government Resolution dated 29 th
February, 2024 and Government Notification dated 30 th January,
2019. A reasoned order be passed on the said representation
within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of this
order and communicate the decision to the Petitioners.
[ ABASAHEB D. SHINDE ] [ NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI ]
JUDGE JUDGE
drp/wp11921-26.doc
Checking your session…