Bombay High Court
BAIG NAWAB SAHEBJANIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANOTHER
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the prior order protecting the petitioners’ service and waiving reservation benefits also guarantees their right to pension and other terminal benefits without the need for a fresh Tribe Validity Certificate.
Summary
The petitioners, former primary teachers appointed under a Scheduled Tribe reservation, were protected by a 2014 High Court order that waived any future reservation benefits but barred adverse action for lack of a Tribe Validity Certificate. After retiring in June 2024, the Zilla Parishads refused to release their pensions, insisting on a fresh validity certificate. The petitioners contended that this demand violated the earlier protective order. The Court examined the 2014 order, relevant government resolutions, and subsequent case law, concluding that the order’s protection extends to all terminal benefits, including pension, and that requiring a new certificate post‑retirement is arbitrary. Consequently, the Court directed the respondents to release the regular pension, arrears, and other benefits within eight weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether a fresh Tribe Validity Certificate can be mandated for the release of pensionary benefits after the petitioner’s retirement despite a prior court order protecting his service.
- Whether the 2014 order protecting the petitioners’ service also obliges the employer to release pension and terminal benefits without further conditions.
Subjects
- reservation
- Scheduled Tribe
- Tribe Validity Certificate
- pension
- service protection
- employment law
- writ petition
- government order
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:24180-DB
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
WRIT PETITION NO. 8310 OF 2025
Baig Nawab s/o Sahebjani
Age : 59 years, Occu : Pensioner,
Presently residing at Bajaj Nagar, Pandharpur,
Tq. & Dist. Chhatrapati Sambhajinagar
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Rural Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
Through its Principal Secretary
2. Zilla Parishad, Chh. Sambhajinagar,
Tq. And Dist. Chh. Sambhajinagar,
Through its Chief Executive Officer
***
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar
AGP for Respondent-State : Mr. V. M. Kagne
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. Prashant R. Nangare
***
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 8329 OF 2025
Markhelkar Samdani s/o Abdul Wahed
Age : 60 years, Occu : Pensioner,
Presently residing at Kher Nagar, Udgir,
Tq. Udgir, Dist. Latur
VERSUS
1. The State of Maharashtra
Rural Development Department,
Mantralaya, Mumbai-32
Through its Principal Secretary
2. Zilla Parishad, Latur,
Tq. And Dist. Latur,
Through its Chief Executive Officer
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-2-
***
Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr. Sushant C. Yeramwar
AGP for Respondent-State : Mr. V. M. Kagne
Advocate for Respondent No. 2 : Mr. U. B. Bondar
***
CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI AND
SACHIN S. DESHMUKH, JJ.
Date : 17th June, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with
the consent of the parties.
2. Since these petitions involve a similar set of facts and a
common question, shall be decided by this common judgment. Writ
petition No. 8329 of 2025 is taken as lead petition.
3. The Petitioner was appointed as a Primary Teacher by
Respondent No. 2 (Zilla Parishad, Latur) vide an order dated
16.07.1992 against a vacancy reserved for the "Takankar"
Scheduled Tribe category. The services of the petitioner were
subsequently confirmed on 14.12.2009.
4. In view of a Government Circular dated 18.05.2013,
the Respondents insisted on the submission of a Tribe Validity
Certificate. The Petitioner challenged this insistence before this
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-3-
Court in Writ Petition No. 2716 of 2014. By an order dated
17.11.2014, this Court allowed the petition and protected the
Petitioner's services on the condition that he would not claim any
future benefits of reservation or promotion. The Petitioner duly filed
the required undertakings before the Scrutiny Committee and
Respondent No. 2 on 08.12.2014.
5. Subsequently, the Petitioner retired from service upon
attaining the age of superannuation on 30.06.2024. Following his
retirement, the Block Education Officer, Udgir, forwarded a
proposal for the release of pension and pensionary benefits to the
Education Officer (Primary), Zilla Parishad, on 03.04.2024.
6. Although repeated representations were made,
however, the Respondents have failed to release the regular
pension and other retiral benefits. The Respondents have orally
insisted that the Petitioner must submit a fresh proposal for
verification and obtain a Tribe Validity Certificate before his pension
can be sanctioned.
7. Aggrieved by the inaction and the insistence on a
Validity Certificate which the Petitioner contends runs directly
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-4-
counter to the service protection conferred by this Court vide order
dated 17.11.2014, the Petitioner has approached this Court
seeking a direction to immediately release his regular monthly
pension, arrears and all other retiral benefits.
8. The learned counsel for petitioner Mr. Yeramwar
submits that the Petitioner's services stand protected pursuant to
order of this Court dated 17.11.2014 passed in Writ Petition No.
2716 of 2014. The Petitioner strictly complied with the Court's
directions by submitting the necessary undertakings to both the
Scrutiny Committee and the employer on 08.12.2014, explicitly
waiving any future reservation or promotional benefits. Having
rendered continuous, confirmed service until his superannuation on
30.06.2024, the Petitioner cannot be deprived of his earned
pensionary benefits.
9. The learned counsel for petitioner further submits that
the Respondents' insistence on a fresh Tribe Validity Certificate as
a precondition for releasing retiral benefits contravenes the order
of this Court.
10. The learned counsel for the Respondents Mr. Nangre
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-5-
and Mr. Bondar representing the Zilla Parishads oppose the petition
submitting that the petitioners were admittedly appointed against a
seat reserved for the Scheduled Tribe category. It is contended
that a Tribe Validity Certificate remains a prerequisite for verifying
the legality of the initial appointment prior to sanctioning retiral
benefits. Therefore, the Respondents argue that the request for a
fresh verification proposal does not violate earlier orders but is a
necessary step to finalize the pension papers.
11. Upon considering the submission advanced on behalf of
both the sides and perusing the material on record, there is no
debate that the petitioners were before this Court in Writ Petition
No. 2297 of 2014 and 2716 of 2014 wherein this Court has
observed in para No. 6 as under :
“6. The respondent Zilla Parishad / employer shall not
take any adverse action against the petitioners only on the
ground that they have not obtained validity certificate in
respect of their tribe claim. The petitioners, henceforth,
shall not claim any benefit of reservation either for
promotion and in employment and for that matter in any
walk of life. The petitioners shall file undertaking before
the Committee that they will not claim benefit of
reservation and as such the proceedings seeking validity
should not be decided. The appropriate entry in
accordance with the present order shall be recorded in the
service-book of the petitioners and such undertaking shall
also be filed by the petitioners with the employer.”
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-6-
12. The primary issue stands squarely covered in view of
directions issued by this Court. Admittedly, the Petitioners’ services
were protected by an order dated 17.11.2014 in Writ Petition No.
2716 of 2014. The said order protected the Petitioners from any
adverse action for want of a Tribe Validity Certificate, subject to the
condition that petitioner would not claim further reservation
benefits. The Petitioner fully complied with this stipulation by
presenting undertakings before both the Scrutiny Committee and
the Respondent-employer on 08.12.2014.
13. Having accepted the aforesaid directions and allowed
the Petitioner to complete his service until superannuation on
30.06.2024, it is no longer open for the Respondents to contend
the contrary the requirement of a validity certificate at the post-
retirement stage.
14. The fact remains that the Government Resolution
(G.R.) dated 15.06.1995 continues to be in vogue. As such, the
consequential protection and benefits conferred by the State, to
which the Petitioner is legally entitled, have been endorsed by this
Court. Furthermore, this legal position is reinforced by the
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-7-
treatment of similarly situated employees. In Writ Petition No. 903
of 2020, where an employee's tribe claim was invalidated by the
Scrutiny Committee, this Court confirmed the service protection.
The State assailed that order before the Hon’ble Apex Court in Civil
Appeal No. 6212 of 2025, which eventually endorsed the view of
this Court and dismissed the Special Leave Petition, placing
reliance on Writ Petition No. 4318 of 2007 which has already
attained finality.
15. In light of these peculiar facts and settled legal
precedents, the action initiated by the Respondents in withholding
the pensionary benefits of the Petitioner for want of a validity
certificate is apparently unjustified.
16. The Respondents’ contention that the prior order
merely protected "service" but did not specifically direct the release
of "pension" is a completely misleading. It is a well-settled principle
of law that pension and pensionary benefits are not a bounty or a
standalone gratuity; rather, they constitute deferred wages earned
by an employee through long, uninterrupted and judicially
protected service. Once the legality of the Petitioner’s entire tenure
until superannuation stands fully secured by order of this Court, all
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-8-
consequential terminal benefits flow from it as an absolute, vested
right. Withholding pensionary benefits on the ground of non-
submission of a validity certificate effectively penalises the
Petitioner after retirement, rendering the 2014 protection
completely hollow.
17. The insistence of the Zilla Parishad authorities
demanding a fresh verification proposal post-retirement is legally
unsustainable, arbitrary and directly contradictory to the binding
orders of this Court. Consequently, the action of the Respondents
in withholding the regular monthly pension, accumulated arrears,
and all terminal benefits is declared illegal.
18. The Respondents shall not insist on the submission of a
Tribe Validity Certificate as a condition precedent for releasing the
post-retirement benefits, in view of the finality attained to the said
issue vide order dated 17.11.2014 in Writ Petition No. 2716/2014.
19. Resultantly, both the Writ Petitions are allowed in
terms of prayer clauses (B) and (C).
20. The Respondent No. 2 (Zilla Parishad) is directed to
forthwith process, grant and release the regular monthly pension,
916 WP No.8310.2025 + 1
-9-
accumulated pensionary arrears, and all other terminal benefits
due to the Petitioner.
21. The exercise of calculating and disbursing the
pensionary arrears and terminal benefits shall be completed within
a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of this order.
22. Rule is made absolute in the above terms.
23. No order as to costs.
(SACHIN S. DESHMUKH) (SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI)
JUDGE JUDGE
Omkar Joshi
Checking your session…