VISHNU KUNDLIK SHINDEversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND ANOTHER

2026:BHC-AUG:9177-DB

                                                                            614-26-WP.odt
                                                {1}

                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                  BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                    WRIT PETITION NO.614 OF 2026

              Vishnu Pundlik Shinde,
              Age: 60 years, Occu.: Pensioner,
              R/o. House No.C-2, Yashraj Angan
              Gut No.-175, Behind HP Petrol Pump,
              Cambridge Bypass Road, Sawanti,
              PO: Chouka, Dist. Aurangabad – 431008.                   … Petitioner

                           Versus

              1. The State of Maharashtra
                 Through Secretary Municipal Corporations,
                 Mantralaya, Mumbai – 400 032.

              2. The Commissioner,
                 Municipal Corporation, Aurangabad.                    … Respondents

                                                 ......
              Ms. A.N. Ansari, Advocate for Petitioner
              Mr. S.K.Tambe, Addl. G.P. for Respondent No.1 – State
              Mr. S.P. Urgunde, Advocate for Respondent No.2
                                                 ......


                                        CORAM    : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
                                                   HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.
                                        DATED    : 27 FEBRUARY, 2026



              JUDGMENT [Per Smt. Vibha V. Kankanwadi, J.] :-

              1.    Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. With the consent of the

              parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal at the stage of

              admission.
                                                                614-26-WP.odt
                                  {2}

2.    The present petition has been filed for release of the pension and

all retirement benefits of the petitioner, together with delayed payment

of pension and retirement benefits from 01.06.2023 till the date the

same are actually paid.


3.    The fact which is not in dispute is that the petitioner is a

handicapped person, who was appointed as Sipai/Peon with respondent

No.2 by an order dated 31.01.1984. During the service of the petitioner,

he had earned promotion in the year 2008 to the post of Junior Clerk.

However, the order for promoting him as a Clerk was passed on

29.07.2022. The petitioner had passed the MSCIT examination in the

year 2004 itself. After putting about 38 years of service, he stood retired

on 01.05.2023 by superannuation; however, Respondent No. 2 has not

paid the pension and retirement benefits, except the GPF and GIS

amounts, and other allowances like transport allowance at the increased

rate have not been paid, and so also the DA difference as per the 7th

Pay Commission was not paid. The service book of the petitioner was

not updated, and therefore, about four months prior to his retirement,

the petitioner was requesting the concerned officer by placing

applications on 27.01.2023, 23.02.2023, and 02.03.2023 that it should

be verified. Now, the office of respondent No.2 by office circular dated

07.10.2020 has stated that the service book should be verified within a
                                                                614-26-WP.odt
                                  {3}

period of five years prior to the date of retirement, and if any excess

amount is paid, then the note should be taken.


4.    The petitioner, therefore, has approached this Court as he is not

getting the pension and the retirement benefits.


5.    Heard. Learned advocate Ms. A.N. Ansari for the petitioner, Mr.

S.K. Tambe, Addl. G.P. for Respondent No.1-State and Learned advocate

Mr. S.P. Urgunde for respondent No.2.


6.    Here, the fact is not in dispute that the petitioner has put around

38 years of service. Getting the service book verified is the

administrative job of the concerned officers in the office of the

Municipal Corporation; the petitioner cannot be held responsible for the

same. It appears that the petitioner was diligent enough in bringing the

fact to the notice of the office that his service book deserves to be got

verified. The petitioner has been promoted as a Junior Clerk in 2008

and as a Senior Clerk in 2022. Each time after the promotion, the pay

fixation would have been done and at that time, the service book would

have been updated. Of course, this is the normal rule, but if the office of

respondent No.2 is not doing it promptly, then the concerned officers

are responsible for the delay.
                                                                   614-26-WP.odt
                                      {4}

7.         We, therefore, dispose of the writ petition by partly allowing it

and directing Respondent No. 2 to get the service book of the petitioner

verified within a period of fifteen (15) days from today and thereafter

to submit a proposal for his pension, along with all consequential

benefits, within a period of one (01) month from today.


8.         In case of failure on the part of respondent No,1 to take up these

steps, then the concerned officers should be held responsible for the

same.


9.         The petitioner is entitled for interest at the rate of 6% per annum

on the delayed payment of pension and retirement benefits from

01.06.2023 till their actual disbursement to the petitioner.


10.        Rule is made absolute in above terms. No order as to costs.



[ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ]                       [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ]
              JUDGE                                      JUDGE



S P Rane