Bombay High Court
GANESH BHILA MAHAJAN AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND ORS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The petition is disposed with a direction to the respondent to consider the petitioners' representation in accordance with the specified pay rules and government notifications and to issue a reasoned order within 60 days.
Summary
The petitioners challenged the fixation of their one‑step pay (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 9 March 2026 to the concerned authority, which remained pending. The Court noted a similar earlier order in Vinod Lahu Patil v. State of Maharashtra (2022). After hearing counsel, the Court held that the petition, being an innocuous prayer, should be disposed by directing the respondent to consider the representation in light of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009, the 2022 amendment, the Government Resolution of 29 February 2024 and the Government Notification of 30 January 2019. The respondent was ordered to pass a reasoned order within 60 days of receiving the copy of the judgment and communicate the decision to the petitioners.
Issues considered
- Whether the pay fixation of the petitioners complies with the 6th and 7th Pay Commission recommendations and the applicable Maharashtra Civil Services pay rules.
- Whether the pending representation dated 9 March 2026 must be considered and decided upon by the respondent.
Legislation cited
- Government Notification — s. 30 January 2019
- Government Resolution — s. 29 February 2024
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) (Amendment) Rules — s. 2022
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules — s. 2009
Subjects
- pay fixation
- Ekstar
- 6th Pay Commission
- 7th Pay Commission
- Maharashtra Civil Services
- writ petition
- representation
- government resolution
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:42980-DB
10.WP.12345.2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 12345 OF 2026
Ganesh Bhila Mahajan and Others ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents
***
Mr. Murge Estling S., Advocate for the Petitioners.
Mr. S. K. Tambe, Addl. GP for Respondent – State.
***
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 16th SEPTEMBER 2026.
PER COURT :
1. The Petitioners are aggrieved, as according to them, their
pay fixation of one step pay scale (Ekstar), in accordance with the 6 th
and 7th Pay Commission recommendations, has been wrongly done.
The Petitioners have made a detailed representation on 09th March
2026 addressed to the 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 17th February, 2022 in Writ Petition No.2304 of 2022 (Vinod
Lahu Patil Vs. The Sate of Maharashtra and Others).
2. We have heard learned advocate for the Petitioners and the
learned AGP.
Shrikant Malani Page 1 of 2
10.WP.12345.2026.doc
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 09th 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 22 nd April
2009 incorporated in the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay)
Rules, 2009, the Notification dated 03 rd February 2023 incorporated in
the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) (Amendment) Rules,
2022, in the light of the Government Resolution dated 29 th February,
2024 and the 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, J. ) ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )
Shrikant Malani Page 2 of 2
Checking your session…