Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

SANDHYA SAKAHARAM PATEL AND ORSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR ITS SECRETARY AND ORS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court allowed the writ petitions, directing the Respondent to scrutinize records and grant the one‑step promotional pay‑scale benefits to eligible petitioners in accordance with the Government Resolution dated 29‑02‑2024.

Summary

The petitioners, a large group of Zilla Parishad employees, sought the benefit of the Ekstar (one‑step promotional) pay‑scale under Government Resolutions dated 06‑08‑2002, 14‑08‑2008 and the latest 29‑02‑2024, claiming entitlement from the date of their appointment in tribal and PESA areas. The State of Maharashtra contended that earlier resolutions did not apply to Zilla Parishad staff and that no automatic entitlement existed without scrutiny. The Court examined prior judgments, notably Hiralal Jagannath Bawa v. State of Maharashtra (W.P. 8824/2021) and W.P. 13842/2025, and held that the latest resolution governs eligibility. It ordered the Education Officer to examine each petitioner’s records within 30 days, grant the one‑step pay‑scale and arrears where eligible, and provide a notice‑and‑hearing process for those found ineligible. The petitions were therefore allowed, with directions for implementation and a provision for statutory remedies for adverse orders.

Issues considered

  • Whether Zilla Parishad employees are covered by the Government Resolutions granting the Ekstar one‑step promotional pay‑scale in tribal and PESA areas.
  • Whether the earlier 2002 and 2008 Government Resolutions apply to the petitioners or only to state servants.
  • Whether the Court should deviate from its earlier rulings in similar cases.
  • What procedure the Respondent must follow to determine eligibility and grant the pay‑scale benefits.

Subjects

  • Ekstar
  • one‑step promotional pay scale
  • tribal area
  • PESA
  • government resolution
  • salary arrears
  • Zilla Parishad employees
  • writ petition
  • eligibility scrutiny
  • statutory remedy

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:21036-DB




                                                -1-
                                                                   wp1348.26.odt

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                 BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               10 WRIT PETITION NO. 1348 OF 2026
              Prashant Nimbajirao Bagul & others           ….Petitioners
               VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                             …..
                               11 WRIT PETITION NO. 1358 OF 2026
              Sushma Manish Shah & others                  ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                             …..
                               56 WRIT PETITION NO. 4885 OF 2026
              Pralhad Jagnnath Rajbhoj & others            ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                              ….
                               57 WRIT PETITION NO. 4886 OF 2026
              Sanjay Dhudku Patil & others                 ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                              ….
                               58 WRIT PETITION NO. 4887 OF 2026
              Hansraj Bansilal Patil & others              ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                             ….
                               59 WRIT PETITION NO. 4888 OF 2026
              Kailash Santosh Patil & others               ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents

                               60 WRIT PETITION NO. 4889 OF 2026
              Manisha Ramdas Borse & others                ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                              ….
                               61 WRIT PETITION NO. 4890 OF 2026
              Bhupendra Kashinath Aabhane & another        ….Petitioners
              VERSUS
              The State of Maharashtra & others            …..Respondents
                                  -2-
                                                    wp1348.26.odt

                62 WRIT PETITION NO. 4891 OF 2026
Magan Shankar Rathod & others               ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                63 WRIT PETITION NO. 4892 OF 2026
Shashikant Ramdas Patil & others            ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                                …..
                64 WRIT PETITION NO. 4893 OF 2026
Vipul Suresh Navale & others                ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                                ….
                65 WRIT PETITION NO. 4894 OF 2026
Pratik Sukhadeo Gavit & another             ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                66 WRIT PETITION NO. 4895 OF 2026
Ravikant Suga Valvi & others                ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                67 WRIT PETITION NO. 4900 OF 2026
Girish Subhash Patil                        ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                68 WRIT PETITION NO. 4904 OF 2026
Pankajkumar Harichandra Sali & others       ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                69 WRIT PETITION NO. 4905 OF 2026
Narendra Motilal Nukte & others             ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                               …..
                70 WRIT PETITION NO. 4906 OF 2026
Sandhya Sakaharam Patel & others            ….Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others           …..Respondents
                                -3-
                                                       wp1348.26.odt

                                 …..
                   WRIT PETITION NO. 261 OF 2026
Ratna Magan Bhamare & others                    .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 5245 OF 2026
Hemangi Shaligram Patil & others                .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 5246 OF 2026
Dattatraya Irbaji Gurupwar & others             .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 5249 OF 2026
Anjali Gajanan Pampatwar & others               .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 5250 OF 2026
Pankaj Yadav Hodgar & others                    .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..
                  WRIT PETITION NO. 5244 OF 2026
Harsing Sona Pawara & others                    .. Petitioners
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra & others               .. Respondents
                               …..

Mr. J. R. Shah, Mr. Y. B. Bolkar, Mr. K. U. Choudhari, Mr. M. R.
Suryawanshi, Mr. E. S. Murge, Advocates for Petitioners in respective
petitions.
Mr. A. B. Girase, GP, Mr. S. K. Tambe, Addl. GP, and Mr. R. S. Wani,
Mr. A. M. Phule, Mr. V. M. Kagne, Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, Ms. N. B.
Kamble, AGPs for Respondent/State in respective petitions.
Mr. R. N. Jain, Advocate for Zilla Parishad, Nandurbar and Primary
Education Officer, in Writ Petition Nos. 4885/2026, 4886/2026,
4889/2026, 4890/2026, 4891/2026, 4892/2026, 4893/2026,
4895/2026, 4900/2026 and 4904/2026.
                                    -4-
                                                             wp1348.26.odt

                                  CORAM :SMT VIBHA KANKANWADI
                                         & AJIT B. KADETHANKAR, JJ.
                                 DATE     : 8th MAY, 2026.
PER COURT :


1.       In these petitions, the Petitioners have prayed for the directions

to the Respondents/authorities to give/grant the benefit of Ekstar

(One step promotional pay scale) under scheme of G.R. dated

06.08.2002 and 29.02.2024 from the date of appointment of the

Petitioners in tribal area and further direction to pay the salary with

arrears to the Petitioners by adding one step pay promotional pay

scale.


2.       We have considered the submissions of the learned Advocates

for the respective sides and we have perused the series of orders

passed by this Court in favour of similarly situated Petitioners, which

have been annexed to the petition.


3.       In view of the above, we do not find any such circumstance,

which would convince us to take a different view.



4.       Learned GP vehemently submitted that the Government

Resolution on which the Petitioners are relying i.e. Government

Resolution dated 06.08.2002 was applicable to the Government
                                 -5-
                                                         wp1348.26.odt

servants and it was not made applicable to the Zilla Parishad

employees   at   that   time.   Without    considering    whether   the

Government Resolutions are applicable to Zilla Parishad employees

or not, the concerned officers are now passing the order in view of the

orders passed by this Court.      Further, when the employees like

Petitioners are employed by the private institution wherein they do

not have any school beyond PESA/tribal area, then the said

resolution will not be applicable. A clarification was issued by the

Government by Resolution dated 14.08.2008.


5.    The learned Advocates representing the respective parties in

those cases (orders which have been annexed to the petition) have

clearly stated that the order passed by this Court at the Principal

Bench, in Writ Petition No. 8824 of 2021 (Hiralal Jagannath Bawa

and others vs. The State of Maharashtra and others), dated

21.12.2021, is applicable to all such cases.


6.    Now, it is to be noted that when this Court had passed the

order in Writ Petition No. 13842/2025, a care was taken to give

direction that the concerned officer should consider the Government

Resolution. This Court had clearly indicated that the scrutiny will

have to be done as per the Government Resolution dated 29.02.2024.
                                 -6-
                                                       wp1348.26.odt

Certainly, then the latest Government Resolution would consider the

Government Resolution dated 14.08.2008 also. Further, this Court

in any of the orders has not given direction that the proposals of the

Petitioners or similarly situated persons should be allowed without

scrutiny. Only after those persons are found eligible then only the

action as contemplated under the Government Resolution was

required to be undertaken.       Therefore, in our opinion, all the

instructions are very much clear which require no deviation.


7.    In view of the above, writ petitions stand allowed in the

following terms :-

      i.    Respondent/Education Officer (Secondary), Zilla
      Parishad, shall scrutinize the records of these Petitioners
      and the places at which they are deployed for performing
      their duties, within a period of 30 days from today,
      considering the Government Resolution dated 29.02.2024
      and/or any other relevant Government Resolution.


      ii.   The cases which have no legal impediment after
      verification, shall be cleared by the concerned Respondent
      and the salary benefits to which the Petitioners are
      entitled to, in the light of the one step pay-scale made
      available to the employees working in the Tribal and
      PESA areas, shall be paid to them along with arrears as
                                  -7-
                                                           wp1348.26.odt

      well as their current salary, within a period of 30 days,
      thereafter.


      iii.   After scrutiny, if the Petitioners, on the basis of
      their record, are found to be ineligible, the concerned
      Respondent, would issue notice to the Petitioners, so as to
      enable them to appear before the said authority and
      address it.


      iv.    After such hearing, which shall be completed within
      120 days, the concerned Respondent shall pass an
      appropriate order and grant benefits of one-step pay-scale
      to those candidates, who are found to be eligible.


      v.     The Petitioners, who may suffer an adverse order
      after the above stated exercise is completed, shall be at
      liberty to avail of a statutory remedy, as is permissible in
      law and in the light of the Government Resolution dated
      29.02.2024    issued   by   the   General   Administration
      Department and/or any other relevant Government
      Resolution.



( AJIT B. KADETHANKAR )                   ( SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI )
         JUDGE                                       JUDGE

dyb


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.