Bombay High Court
VAMAN TRYAMBAK KHAIRNAR AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS SECRETARY TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the petitioners are entitled to the benefits sought and directed the respondents to consider their applications in accordance with the relevant notifications, Government Resolutions and Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules.
Summary
The petitioners, who have been employed in tribal areas, filed writ petitions under Article 226 seeking the grant of increments and one‑step promotional pay scales with grade pay of Rs. 4300 and Rs. 4800 as per the Notification dated 3 February 2023 and the 6th Pay Commission. They relied on Government Resolutions dated 6 August 2002 and 29 February 2024 and on a prior order dated 6 August 2024 that had granted similar benefits to other employees working in tribal areas. The Court noted earlier judgments (Sanjay S/o Daulat Deore & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 2099 of 2026 and Vinod Lahu Patil v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 2304 of 2022) directing the authorities to consider pending representations in light of the relevant notifications and rules. After examining the applicable Government Resolutions, the 2023 Notification and the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, the Court directed that the applications be considered by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nashik, and ordered a reasoned decision within 60 days. The petitions were disposed of without costs, leaving the parties’ contentions open for further hearing.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to the increment and grade pay as per the 3 February 2023 Notification and the 6th Pay Commission.
- Whether the petitioners should receive the one‑step promotional pay scale with grade pay of Rs. 4300 and Rs. 4800.
- Whether the respondents are obligated to consider the pending representations and pass a reasoned order within the stipulated time.
- Whether the denial of the benefits amounts to unlawful discrimination violating the principle of equality.
Subjects
- Article 226
- Pay fixation
- 6th Pay Commission
- Grade pay
- Tribal area employment
- Equality
- Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules
- Government Resolution
- One‑step promotion
Judgment
AJIT
RAMESH
PATHRIKAR 77-WP-12457-2026.DOC
Digitally signed by
AJIT RAMESH
PATHRIKAR
Date: 2026.10.09
13:52:00 +0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 12457 OF 2026
Sunil S/o Bhila Jadhav ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra
Throu. Its Sec. Tribal Development Dept & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12458 OF 2026
Apeksha Rajaram Shirsath ...Petitioner
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra
Thr Sec. Tribal Development Dept. & Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 12459 OF 2026
Vaman Tryambak Khairnar & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra
Thr. Its Secretary Tribal Development Department & Ors. ...Respondents
_______
Ms. Megha Y Mali for the Petitioner in all petitions
Mr. A. K.Naik, AGP in WP/12457/2026
Ms. Priyanka B. Chavan, AGP in WP/12458/2026
Ms. P. N. Diwan, AGP, State in WP/12459/2026
_______
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 30th SEPTEMBER 2026
P.C.
1. These petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the
Petitioners, who are working in a tribal area since the date of their initial
appointment and continue to do so till date, seeking directions to the Respondents
to grant them the benefit of the increment with grade pay as per Notification dated
Page 1 of 4
Ajit Pathrikar
77-WP-12457-2026.DOC
3rd February 2023. The Petitioners further seek a direction to grant them the
benefit of one-step promotional pay scale with grade pay of Rs.4300 & 4800 under
the 6th Pay Commission, in view of the said Notification. The Petitioners have also
sought a direction that their salaries be paid as per the extent of the one-step pay
scale as per Government Resolutions (GRs) dated 6 th August 2002 and 29th
February 2024, including the promotional pay scale with grade pay, for the period
during which the Petitioners were working in the tribal area.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the Petitioners. For convenience, we note
the prayers made in the petition, which read as under:
“A. The Writ Petition may kindly be allowed.
B. The respondent authority (Resp. No. 4 to 6) may kindly be direct to decide
the representation in respect of grade pay from 4200 to 4300 & 4400-4800 in 6 th
pay commission. By issuing writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order
or direction as the case may be.
C. The Hon'ble High Court, By issuing appropriate writ, order or direction may
kindly be direct the resp. No. 4 & 6 to consider the case of the petitioner in view of
Govt. resolution dated 06.08.2002 & Notification dated 03.02.2023 issued by the
Deputy Secretary of Finance Dept.,
D. The Respondent authority (Resp. No. 4 to 6) may kindly be direct to extend
the benefit of one step promotion pay scale to the petitioners & grant the pay scale
in 6th pay commission is 9300-34800 with grade pay 4300 & 9300-34800 with
Grade pay 4800 to the Secondary Teachers as they are working in tribal area.”
3. The learned counsel for the Petitioners has placed reliance on the order
dated 30th February 2026 passed by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in a batch of
petitions, including Sanjay S/o. Daulat Deore & Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra &
Ors. (Writ Petition No. 2099 of 2026) along with other connected petitions. In
similar circumstances, this Court passed the following order:
Page 2 of 4
Ajit Pathrikar
77-WP-12457-2026.DOC
“P.C:
1. The Petitioners before us are aggrieved that their pay fixation in
accordance with the 6th and 7th Pay Commission recommendations, has
been erroneously settled. Detailed representations dated 09.12.2025,
16.12.2025, 17.12.2025, 29.12.2025, 01.01.2026 and 30/31.12.2025
respectively, addressed to Respondent Nos.4 and 5 Authority, are pending
and no decision is delivered by the said authority. It is pointed out that in
identical set of circumstances, this Court has earlier passed an order dated
17.02.2022 in Writ Petition No.2304 of 2022 filed by Vinod Lahu Patil Vs.
The State of Maharashtra and Ors.
2. An innocuous prayer is put forth. We have heard the learned
AGPs on behalf of Respondent Nos.1 to 4. We are not required to issue
notice to Respondent Nos.5 and 6.
3. As such, these Petitions are disposed off. We direct Respondent
Nos.4 and 5 to consider the representations dated 09.12.2025, 16.12.2025,
17.12.2025, 29.12.2025, 01.01.2026 and 30/31.12.2025 in the light of the
grounds set out by the Petitioners, strictly in accordance with law and by
considering the notification dated 22.04.2009 incorporated in the
Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2009 and the notification
dated 03.02.2023 incorporated in the Maharashtra Civil Services (Revised
Pay) (Amendment) Rules, 2022. A reasoned order be passed on the said
representation within 60 days from today.”
4. The learned counsel for the Petitioners has drawn our attention to the GR
dated 6th August 2002, the notification dated 3rd February 2023 issued by the
Deputy Secretary, and the order dated 6th August 2024, whereby similarly placed
employees who had worked in a tribal area were granted the benefit of the grade
pay as prayed for by the Petitioners. The Petitioners’ contention is that they cannot
be discriminated and are required to be treated at par with the similarly placed
employees, particularly in view of the order dated 6 th August 2024 granting the
benefit of the said pay scale. No reasons are set out as to why the Petitioners are not
granted the said benefits.
Page 3 of 4
Ajit Pathrikar
77-WP-12457-2026.DOC
5. In the aforesaid circumstances, having perused the GRs dated 6 th August
2002 and 29th February 2024, as also the notification dated 3rd February 2023, we
are of the opinion that, in the interest of justice, the applications/proposals made by
the management in the present petitions be considered and decided by the Chief
Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Nashik, in accordance with law, after considering
the entitlement of the Petitioners to the pay scale to which they are so eligible.
6. The Division Bench has passed similar directions in the order passed in the
batch of petitions in Sanjay S/o. Daulat Deore & Ors. (supra). We have also, in fact,
disposed of these petitions in terms of similar directions as contained in paragraph
3 of the said order.
7. All contentions of the parties in that regard are expressly kept open.
8. Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 4 of 4
Ajit Pathrikar
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.