1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

NAGPUR BENCH: NAGPUR

WRIT PETITION NO. of 2021

In the matter of Articles 14 and 226 of

the Constitution of India;

And

In the matter of Article 39(d) of the

Constitution of India;

And

In the matter of Govt. Resolution No.

TEM 3382/111836/(190)/TE-1(A) Dated
21st May 1983 issued by Education and
Employment Department of State of
Maharashtra.

And

In the matter of Advertisement dated

12/07/2012 in Indian Express News
Paper and 09.07.2013 issued by
Respondent No. 1 for filling up the post
in various Departments of Vikramshila
Polytechnic Darapur run by Shri
Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust,
Amravati duly approved, executed and
controlled by Respondent No. 10 to 13.

And
 2

In the matter of petitioners seeking

arrears of salary, increments, salary,
and mandatory provision of gratuity
and time bound promotion (Career
Advancement Scheme) benefits as per
rules and regulation Director of
Technical Education of Government of
Maharashtra.

Dr. Dipak Vinayak Shirbhate, aged

about 47 years residing at Rachana
Residency, Wing No. 4, Plot No. 119,
Ganediwal Layout, Bhagyanagar …Petitioner
Camp, Amravati-444602.

Versus
1. Shri Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable
Trust, through its Administrative
Office and Secretary, Prof. P. R. S.
44, Kamal Pushpa, Congress Nagar,
Road Amravati, Maharashtra. Pin –
444 606

2. Dr. Sau. Kamaltai R. Gawai,

Founder President, Shri Dadasaheb
Gawai Charitable Trust, (Address..)

3. Mrs. Kirtitai R. Arjun, President Shri …Respondents

Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust,
(Address..)

4. Shri Dharam Rajesh Arjun, Vice-

President Shri Dadasaheb Gawai
Charitable Trust, (Address..)
 3

5. Mr. Rajesh Arjun, Treasurer Shri

Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust,
(Address..)

6. Shri. Karan Rajesh Arjun, Trustee

Shri Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable
Trust, (Address..)

7. Dr. Rajendra R. Gawai, Trustee Shri

Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust,
(Address..)

8. Prof. M. M. Patil, Principal (addl.

Charge), Vikramshila Polytechnic,
At & Post Darapur, Taluka
Darayapur, District – Amravati, Pin
– 444 606

9. The State of Maharashtra, through

its Secretary, Technical Education
Department, Mantralaya, Mumbai –
400 032 (Address..)

10. Directorate Of Technical

Education Maharashtra State
through its _______, Dr. Abhay
Wagh, 3, Mahapalika Marg, Post
Box No. 1967, Opp. Metro Cinema,
Mumbai - 400 001

11. The Joint Director, Technical

Education, Regional Office,
Polytechnic Campus, New Cotton
Market Road, Sahkar Nagar,
Amravati – 444 603 through Dr. V.
R. Mankar (I/c Joint Director)
 4

12. Maharashtra State Board of

Technical Education through its
Director, Dr. Vinod Mohitkar, Govt.
Polytechnic Bldg., 4th floor, 49,
Kherwadi, Ali Yawar Jung Marg,
Bandra, Mumbai-400 051.

13. All India Council of Technical

Education, through its Chairman
_________, Western Regional
Office, Industrial Research Building,
2nd floor, National Institute of
Industrial Engineering (NITIE)
Campus, Vihar Lake, Mumbai - 400
087

14. Deputy Director, Maharashtra

State Board of Technical Education,
Regional Office, Mangalwari Bazar,
Sadar, Nagpur – 440 001

15. Fees Regulating Authority

through its under-secretary and
Appealing officer - Shri. Milind
Shenoy, 305, Govt. Polytechnic
Building, 49, Kherwadi, Ali Yawar
Jung Marg, Bandra (East), Mumbai
- 400 051 (M.S.), INDIA.

To,
 5

THE HON'BLE CHIEF JUSTICE AND OTHER HON'BLE PUISNE

JUDGES OF THIS HON’BLE COURT.

THE HUMBLE PETITION OF THE

PETITIONER ABOVE NAMED.

MOST RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH:

1. By this present Petition, the Petitioner is approaching this

Hon’ble Court in this Writ Jurisdiction, under Article 226 of the

Constitution of India, praying inter-alia for issuance of Writ of

Mandamus and other appropriate Writ, Order or Directions,

directing the Respondent No. 1 TO 7 to release his arrears of

monthly salaries, deficient in monthly salary, perks, Dearness

Allowance (DA) as applicable from time to time along with

applicable simple Bank interest. The Petitioner is compelled to

file this present Petition, as the Respondents, for the reasons

best known to them, have failed to release or pass an

appropriate Orders and/or directions directing the Respondent

Nos. 1 to 7 to release the legitimate dues as aforesaid.

2. The Petitioner is a citizen of India and is regular / permanent

employee of Shri Vikaramshit Polytechnic, Darapur, Taluka –

Daryapur, District – Amravati, run and managed by Shri

Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust, Amravati through its Board

of Trustees, the Respondent 1 herein and working as Head of

 6

Department, Department of Mechanical Engineering since

August 01, 2010. The appointment of the Petitioner is duly

approved by Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education

(MSBTE), Mumbai.

3. The Respondent No. 1, namely, Shri Dadasaheb Gawai

Charitable Trust, Amravati (A Buddhist Minority Institution

Recognized by the Government of Maharashtra) was

established in the year 1991. Vikramshila Polytechnic, Darapur,

Taluka – Daryapur, District – Amravati, a Polytechnic Collage is

run and managed by Shri Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust,

Amravati through its Board of Trustees.

4. The Respondent No. 2 to 7 are present founder President,

President, Vice-President, Treasurer and also trustees

receptively of Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No. 8 is

present Principle (additional charge), Vikramshila Polytechnic

Collage. The Respondent No. 9 is the State of Maharashtra.

The Respondent No. 10 and 11 are Directorate of Technical

Education Maharashtra State, Mumbai and Joint Director of

Technical Education, Amravati in Maharashtra through its

respective Director and Joint Director. Respondent No. 12 is

Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education through its

Director, Bandra, Mumbai. Respondent No. 13 is All India

Council of Technical Education (“AICTE”), through its

Chairman, Western Regional Office, Mumbai. Respondent No.

 7

14 is Fees Regulating Authority through its under-secretary

and Appealing officer Bandra (East), Mumbai.

5. The facts necessary for the appreciation of the present case

are briefly stated, hereinafter:

i) Vikramshila Polytechnic, Darapur, Taluka – Daryapur,

District – Amravati, Maharashtra State is an unaided

institute started under 'Opening of new Technical and

Technological Colleges and Polytechnics on no grant in

aid pattern vide Government Resolution (for sake of

brevity “GR”) No TEM 3382/111836 / (190)/TE -1(A)

Dated 21st May 1983. According to this GR, it is the

responsibility of the trust/education society to pay salary

and allowances of employees permitted to operate under

this GR. Vide Government Resolution dated 21st May,

1983 all technical colleges, including polytechnics run by

any agency, either aided or unaided, were required to

abide by the Rules and Regulations issued by the

Government of Maharashtra or by the Director of

Technical Education (for sake of brevity “DTE”) from

time to time. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P

– 1 is copy of GR dated 21st May 1983.

ii) The Respondent No. 1 was granted permission to open a

polytechnic during the academic year 2010-11 vide DTE

 8

approval letter क्रमांक १०/एआयसीटीई/पदविका / मान्यता

/२०१०/५७३ dated 16th August 2010 on such terms and

conditions more particualy mentioned therein including

appointment of full time Faculty members / Teaches and

other Technical Staff/employees and to pay their salaries

and dearness allownces as per Goverment’s rules. The

DTE letter clearly state that wages and allowances

should be given as per Government Rules and

Regulation. In case of any complaint from the employee

pertaining to wages and allowances, strict action will be

taken from DTE. Hereto annexed and marked Exhibit S is

the DTE approval letter. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 2 is copy of DTE letter dated 16th August

2010.

iii) Government of India enacted the All-India Council for

Technical Education Act, 1987. Pursuant to the said Act

the All-India Council for Technical Education, Mumbai

(for sake of brevity “AICTE”) grants permission to

technical colleges with the concurrence of the concerned

State Government under section 10 of the said Act and it

is responsible for prescribing the specific norms and

standards, including pay scales and service conditions of

the teaching staff so as to maintain the qualitative

standard of education all over the country. It is stated

 9

that the Respondent No. 10 derives his authority to issue

directions to such institutions under section 4 of the

Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of

Service) Regulations Act, 1977 (M.E.P.S. Act, for short)

and it is not permissible in law for a private un-aided

technical or non-technical institute to contend that it was

not liable to pay salaries as per the pay scales prescribed

by the Government in view of the judgment of the

Supreme Court in the case of (K. Krishnamacharyulu and

other v. Shri Venkateshwara College of Engineering and

others)i, A..R. 1998 S.C. 295. The private education

institutes like the polytechnic come within the ambit of

the M.E.P.S. Act and the Rules framed there under and,

therefore, the Respondent Nos. 10, 11 and 12 have the

authority to issue instructions/directions to such

institutes to pay the salaries as per the prescribed rates.

In nutshell, Respondent No. 1 required to pay the

salaries along with applicable dearness allowances. The

Petitioner craves leave to refer to and reply upon the

provisions of the said Act, All-India Council for Technical

Education Act, 1987.

iv) In pursuance of the authorities under the MEPS Act, the

Respondent No. 12, vide its letter bearing reference No.

F. 22 -3018 / 2010 (DIP ENGG) dated 30th June 2010

 10

granted its approval to Respondent No. 1 for

establishment of Diploma Level Programme in DIPLOMA

ENGG Diploma in the name and style of SHRI

DADASAHEB GAVAI CHARITABLE TRUST VIKRAMSHILA

POLYTECHNIC (hereinafter referred to as “Vikramshila

Polytechnic”) as per laid down procedure, guidelines,

policy and / or norms and standards of AICTE, more

particularly in the said approval letter and AICTE

Regulations and/or AICTE Hand Book for Approval

Process. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P – 3

is copy of AICTE letter dated 30th June 2010. The said

Vikramshila Polytechnic is also affiliated to Maharashtra

State Board of Technical Education (MSBTE in short),

Respondent No12 herein, having MSBTE registration No.

1444 and DTE No. 1247 (Director of Technical

Education). This Petitioner also crave leave to refer and

reply upon the AICTE Regulations, procedure, guidelines,

policy and / or norms and standards of AICTE and/or

AICTE Hand Book for Approval Process as and when

produce.

v) The Petitioner state and submit that Respondent 1

inducted the petitioners in the regular service on various

posts vide appointment orders duly signed by secretary

of the Trust. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P –

 11

4 is the copy of appointment orders of the petitioner. No

technical service break was given to the Petitioner and

no-show cause was issued for any misconduct during the

entire service period up till now, which was adjudicated

to its logical conclusion.

vi) The Petitioner submits that the services of the Petitioner

was approved by Maharashtra State Board of Technical

Education Vide letter जा/ क्र. मरातंशिम / का-५०(८७)/शि.प.

मान्यता / २०१३/७५६३ दिनांक ६ नोव्हें बर २०१३ and जा. क्र.

मरातंशिम / का-५० (८७)/शि. प मान्यता / २०१४ / ९८४१ दिनांक

९ ऑक्टोबर २०१४, the Respondetn No. 12 herein in year

2013 and 2014 respectively. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 5 Collectively are the copy of approval

letters issued by Maharashtra State Board of Technical

Education.

vii) The Petitioner submits that as per the rules and

regulation of Maharashtra State Board of Technical

Education, the recruitment advertisement was published

in state level newspaper of Marathi, Hindi and English

Language as per the advertisement draft duly approved

by MSBTE. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P –

 12

6 Collectively is the copy of News Paper advertisement

duly approved by MSBTE.

viii) The Petitioners state that as per the advertisement draft

published in News Paper it was clearly mentioned that

the pay scale and qualification will be according to All

India Council of Technical Education, Respondent No. __

herein, Director of Technical Education, the Respondent

No. __ herein and Government of Maharashtra rules and

regulations from time to time. Thus, AICTE provides the

norms/guidelines of the pay scales payable to the

teachers, qualifications and service conditions for

teachers and other academic staff in technical

institutions (Diploma), which is to be implemented by the

State Government. The Petitioner state that the

Respondent No.1 has given an undertaking to the AICTE

and declared that the management/institute is paying full

salary to the staff as per Rules and Regulations. It is

submitted that the Government Resolution No. SPC-

2010/(34/10)/TE 2 issued by Higher and Technical

Education Department of Government of Maharashtra

dated 20th August 2020 prescribes the pay scales of the

teachers in diploma level technical education as per 6th

Pay Commission. Under the said G.R. the Government in

fact accepted the recommendations issued by AICTE

 13

under notification dated 5th March 2010. The distinction

cannot be made in respect of the pay scales payable to

the members of the teaching of aided diploma college

and unaided one. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 7 is the Government Resolution No. SPC-

2010/(34/10)/TE-2 issued by Higher and Technical

Education Department of Government of Maharashtra

dated 20th August 2020.

ix) The Petitioner submits that the approval process was

conducted by Expert Committee duly constituted and

appointed by MSBTE. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 8 is a copy of letter bearing No.

____________ dated 4th October 2012 issued by

MSBTE, Divisional Office: Nagpur.

x) The Petitioner submits that the expert committee duly

appointed by MSBTE finalized the Pay Scale of Petitioner

as per AICTE, DTE and Government of Maharashtra rules

and regulations and it was presumed that Respondent

No. 1 should strictly follow these rules and regulation as

it is mandatory for an unaided college to give all financial

benefits as per GR Resolution No. TEM 3382/111836/

(50)/TE-1(A) Dated 21st May 1983. The Petitioner

respectfully brings to the notice of this Hon’ble Court that

 14

the Petitioner was appointed in his post which was

vacant and sanctioned by following a valid process of

appointment. The entire process was monitored strictly

by Respondent No. 12. Further, Petitioner submits

specifically that the performance of the Petitioner is

excellent and there is no flaw pointed out by Respondent

1 in his working since his initial appointment. Along with

the Petition, the petitioner want to place on record his

educational qualifications, date of joining, designation

and the capacity in which he came to be appointed by

the Respondent No.1.

xi) The Petitioner submits that he has successfully

completed probation period and management has

regularized his services. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 9 Collectively are the continuation

orders of Petitioner.

xii) The Petitioner submit that the Respondent 1 partially

followed the guidelines/ rules and regulation by

implementing pay scale to the Petitioner with less

Dearness Allowance (DA) declared by Government of

Maharashtra from time to time, thereby petitioner

suffered heavy financial losses. The estimated financial

loss till date is tabulated separately and annexed hereto

and marked Annexure P – 10.

 15

xiii) [ Please check >> whether Gratuity issue to be inserted

or not] The Petitioner submit that the Respondent 1

denied after retirement benefits such as Gratuity as no

salary deduction were made up till now towards the

Gratuity, thereby seriously violated the provisions of

Payment of Gratuity Act 1972 made in the year 2009, by

which a teacher is not only an employee but also entitled

to get gratuity with retrospective effect. A decision in

writ Petition No 3415 of 2011 in this regard of Bombay

High Court Bench at Nagpur delivered on 21st February

2012 inter-alia confirming the facilities to be extended to

teachers. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P –

11 is copy of High Court dated 21st February 2012.

xiv) The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner employed as

teaching staff has invoked the writ jurisdiction of this

Hon’ble Court, seeking implementation of the

Government Resolutions/Circulars issued by the State

Government, thereby extending the benefits of the pay

scales as contained in the said Government Resolution

and seeking payment of arrears flowing there from. The

Petitioner has also claimed a relief of payment of salary

in accordance with the pay scales and allowances

applicable to the post held by the him on a regular basis

 16

and has also sought direction to deposit the death-cum-

retirement gratuity.

xv) The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner holds the posts

which do not have any scope of promotion and therefore

government have introduced Carrier Advancement

Scheme hereafter called as “CAS”. The CAS was

introduced specifically to promote teachers which cannot

be promoted to higher posts even if they acquire higher

qualification and experience. The Respondent 1 have not

taken any step for implementation of CAS up till now

which has caused heavy financial losses to the Petitioner.

Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P – 12

Collectively is the copy of Higher and Technical

Education Department Government Resolution No.: CAS-

2013/(32/13)/TE-2 Mantralaya Annex, Mumbai- 400 032

dated 17th October, 2015 for ready reference.

xvi) The Petitioner submits that Fee Regulation Authority

here afterwards called as “FRA” formerly known as

Shikshan Shulka Samiti clearly states in their guidelines

that 70% of the budgetary provisions should be strictly

spent on salary. It is submitted that audited financial

reports of last 10 years clearly shows the violation of

guidelines of FRA thereby Petitioner suffered heavy

financial losses. Respondent 1 have not applied for any

 17

fee hike from 2018 onwards which resulted in no Fee

hike after year 2016. The Petitioner received last salary

increment in year 2016. Respondent 1 denied any annual

salary increments after year 2016. The Petitioner submits

that the annual salary increments given up to year 2016

from the date of appointment were arbitrary, baseless,

marginal and lot of irregularity can be found in annual

salary increments. The annual salary increments received

up to year 2016 not in accordance with Government

Rules and Regulation. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 13 Collectively is the bank statements

of the Petitioner showing salary received in hand after

deduction from the date of joining till date.

xvii) The Petitioner submits that the thumb rule of FRA states

that the Fees charged to the students have two

components i.e., Tuition Fees and Development Fees.

The component of Tuition Fees should be entirely spent

on salary whereas Development Fees component can be

utilized for creating assets. The audited financial reports

clearly states that the guidelines of FRA were violated

and salary component was utilized for creating assets.

The petitioner approached Respondent 1 for salary hike,

the Management has contended that it cannot afford to

implement the aforesaid pay scales and Dearness

 18

Allowance (DA) as it does not receive grants-in-aid from

the Government. In view of the Rules and directions

already mentioned, this contention of Management

should not be considered. Further in section 10 (n) of

A.I.C.T.E. Act, 1987, commercialization of technical

education cannot be allowed to be done. The State

Government constitutes Fee Regulatory Authority for

fixing the fees of students of such professional courses

and the law prepared in that regard should be carefully

examined. While fixing the fees, such FRA is expected to

consider the salaries and allowances required to be paid

by the Management to teaching staff. FRA builds into the

fee structure an inflation factor of 5% per year. Due to

this reason also, the contention with regard to

affordability of the Management cannot be considered.

There are other reasons also like the maintaining the

standards of the course. In the case reported as AIR

1998 SC 295 (K. Krishnamacharyulu and Ors. Vs. Sri

Venkateshwara Hindu College of Engineering and

Another) while considering similar claim of the

employees, the Apex Court held that in such a claim,

there is an element of public interest and so Article 226

of Constitution of India needs to be used in such cases.

 19

xviii) The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is aggrieved by

non-extension of benefits of the 6th pay commission pay

scales which were applicable to them up to year 2015,

including the various allowances and provision of other

service benefits as extended to the Teacher's working in

the Non-Aided Polytechnics through various resolutions

passed by the State of Maharashtra. The Petitioner

submits that the State Government issued a resolution

on Government Resolution No.1111/44/19/m.ft.2, Dated:

11th September, 2019 thereby Revision of Pay Scales,

Minimum Qualifications for appointments, Terms and

Conditions of Teachers and other academic staff in

MSBTE affiliated/Autonomous! Government, Non-

Government aided/University departments Aided

Engineering and Technology Architectural/

Pharmacy/HMCT Diploma Level Technical Institutes as

per AICTE Scheme (7th Pay Commission). The Petitioner

submit that, he is appointed as Teacher falling within the

purview of the said Government Resolution and is

entitled for the revision of his pay with effect from 1st

January 2016. Reliance is also placed by the Petitioner

on a communication issued by the Director, Technical

Education addressed to the Principals/Chairman of non-

aided engineering/technical colleges including the

colleges of Pharmacy, Architecture etc, thereby making it

 20

obligatory on part of all the non-aided institutions to pay

the salary and allowances applicable to its employees as

per Government Rules and Regulations in force including

the benefits like the bonus, benefits of Leave Travel

Concession, gratuity, provident fund etc. The said

communication made it imperative on the Management

to pay the said pay scale as per government norms,

since it was one of the binding conditions imposed at the

time of starting the various courses at these institutions.

The Petitioner has also placed reliance on a Government

Resolution No. 1111/44/19/2, Dated: 11th September,

2019, resolving to implement the revised pay scales to

the teachers of the Government and government aided

polytechnics, to submit that the Teachers working in the

non-aided polytechnic institutes are also entitled for the

coverage of the said Government Resolution. Hereto

annexed and marked Annexure P – 14 Collectively is

copy of Government Resolution dated 11th September,

2019.

xix) The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner has staked his

claim on the basis of the aforesaid Government

Resolutions and has stated in the Petition that the

Respondent no.1 which is an unaided polytechnic is

bound by the decision of the State Government, as

 21

contained in the aforesaid Resolutions and the

Respondent Nos.10, 11 and 12 are duty bound to extend

the benefit of the said resolutions to Petitioner. The

Petitioner would submit that the Director of Technical

Education had already indicated to the Respondent No.1

through its communication that they are duly bound to

abide by the norms as set out by the State Government

in relation to the salary and allowances to be paid to the

employees of the unaided polytechnic institutions and

noncompliance thereof would result in serious

consequences including its de recognition/de-affiliation.

The specific grievance of the Petitioner is that on more

than one occasion, the Petitioner has lawfully demanded

the pay scales and allowances admissible to him as per

the Government Rules and Regulations, including

extension of other service benefits. The Petitioner also

prayed for payment of their salary in time, in the

backdrop that there was undue delay in payment of his

monthly salary causing great concern to the Petitioner

and resulting into a tremendous financial hardship. The

Petitioner had adopted several modes of protest against

the non-payment of salary in time and also on failure on

the part of Respondent Nos. 1 to 9 in extending the

benefits of the revised pay scales.

 22

xx) [ Petitioner to confirm >> The Petitioner submits that

the Respondent No.1 deposited security deposit with

DTE of Rs. 15 Lakhs Receipt No. 9166594 Dated

02/06/2010 and Rs 6 Lakhs, Receipt No 9166615 for

First Year Deposit and Rs 5 Lakhs as second year deposit

and Rs.100 Lakhs with AICTE so that in event of any

dispute between employees and Management, salary can

be paid to employees. The petitioner humbly requests

the court to seize these deposits and give interim relief.

xxi) The Petitioner submit that Respondent No. 1 through its

representative i.e., Principal, gave affidavit to MSBTE,

DTE, AICTE that they are paying salaries to faculties as

per norms every year for Affiliation and Extension of

Approval and therefore management is well aware of this

fact. The Petitioner approached management for pay

scale as per norms but management has taken a stand

that they are not in position to pay the salaries as per

the pay scales prescribed by the Government as college

is a non-aided college. However, college is recognized

hence college is bound to pay salary, including D.A. as

per pay scale prescribed by the Government particularly

in view of the fact that at the time of obtaining

recognition the college has given undertaking to comply

with all conditions including payment as per the scale

 23

prescribed by the Government. The Petitioner crave

leave to refer to reply upon first approval letter form DTE

as also from AICTE, when produced.

xxii) The Petitioner submits that he has spent substantial

period i.e., more than a decade in the employment of

Respondent 1. It is now difficult for the Petitioner to

move to other equivalent posts in Government and

Government Aided organization due to age limit

restrictions.

xxiii) The Petitioner submit that as per DTE approval letter

क्रमांक: १०/एआयसीटीई/पदविका मान्यता /२०१०/५७३ दिनांक १६

ऑगस्ट २०१० Respondent has deposited Rs 15 Lakhs,

Receipt No. 9166594 Dated 02/06/2010 towards AICTE

security deposit, Rs 6 Lakhs, Receipt No 9166615 for

First Year Deposit and Rs 5 Lakhs as second year

deposit. As the purpose of this security deposit is to

protect the interest of employees in case of any dispute,

Petitioners therefore demands to seize these deposits

and give interim relief.

xxiv) The Petitioners submit that respondent 1 through its

secretary circulated mail on 31 March 2021 asking

 24

Petitioners to give their consent letter for salary cut as

50% for having salary more than 40,000/-, 40% salary

cut for salary more than 20,000/- and 30% salary cut for

salary more than 10,000/-. The Petitioners were

informed that salary of April 2020 will be credited to their

bank account only after their consent letter for the above

salary cut. Aggrieved by this decision, Petitioners decided

to move to court. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 15 Collectively is mail circulated to all

Petitioners along with Secretary of Respondent No. 1

downloaded from the computer system of the Petitioner

along Certificate under the provisions of Section 65A of

the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 proving admissibility of

the electronic record.

xxv) The Petitioner submits that they are entitled to equal pay

so as to be on par with Government Employees under

Article 39(d) of the Indian Constitution.

xxvi) The Petitioner, therefore, along with its another 4

colleagues addressed a letter dated 8th August 2021 to

the Hon’ble Secretary, Shri Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable

Trust, the Respondent No. 1 herein, inter-alia informing

that in spite of the Petitioner and all his other colleagues

teaching staff were performing well for the progress of

Vikramshila Polytechnic Institution since last serval years,

 25

but the Petitioner and his other colleagues were provided

deficient monthly salaries to the extent of about 50%

since almost last 10 years. It is further submitted that

such deficient in salary seriously affecting routine budget

and daily life, including that of during the period Covid-

19 pandemic and constrains which were occur to humbly

demand the arrears of salary so as to ease the burden

on the status as well as liabilities of the Petitioner and

others. The Petitioner and others therefore, requested

the Hon’ble Secretary to look into the matter at the

earliest with pious object to resolve the same within as

time frame of 30 days in the interest of natural justice.

The Petitioners and others also forwarded the statement

of arrears of claim of 6th and 7th pay commission and

excel sheet with particular of relevant details. Hereto

annexed and marked Annexure P - 16 Collectively is

a copy of said letter dated 8th August 2021 along with its

enclosures. However, although the receipt of the said

letter, the said Hon’ble Secretary neither acknowledges

the grievances of the Petitioners and others nor have

paid any amount towards arrears of salary or difference

in salary due to application of 6th and 7th pay

commission.
 26

xxvii) The Petitioner, thereafter through his Advocates Notice

dated 03rd March 2022 addressed to the said the

Hon’ble Secretary, Shri Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable

Trust, the Respondent No. 1 herein, inter-alia the

Petitioner has made enduring efforts to submit his

written demand with regards to his deficient salaries and

attempt to brought to the notice of the Respondent No.

1 the financial troubles faced by the Petitioner on

account the 50% salary deficient and non-

implementation of 6th pay commission from August 2010

till 2016 and thereafter non-implementation of 7th pay

commission as per Government Resolution dated 11th

September 2019 and also failure on the part of

Respondent No. 1 to comply with the statutory provision

of the Provident Fund, however the Petitioner was

intentionally denied the same. The Petitioner, through his

Advocate’s said demand notice called upon the

Respondent No. 1 to pay all pending salaries, arrears of

salaries, perks, Dearness Allowance (DA) as applicable

along with applicable bank interest rate. The copies of

said letter were also marked to Respondent No. 9 to 14

and also to Maharashtra Human Right Commission.

Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P - 17

Collectively is a copy of Advocates Notice dated 03rd

March 2022.
 27

xxviii)The Petitioner, thereafter vide its email at

rbteng@msbte.com dated 8th April 2022 @ 13.26 sent to

Dy. Secretary, Maharashtra State Board of Technical

Education, Regional Office Nagpur informed that the

online tracking system of postal department shows that

legal notice dated 03rd March 2022 has been delivered

to his good office and requested to sent his clarification /

action taken on the same. However, no appropriate

action has been taken in this regard. Hereto annexed

and marked Annexure P – 18 is copy of said email

dated 8th April 2022 downloaded from the computer

system of the Petitioner along Certificate under the

provisions of Section 65A of the Indian Evidence Act,

1872 proving admissibility of the electronic record.

xxix) The Petitioner thereafter, vide its letters dated 16th May

2022 addressed to (i) The Advisor -1 (Approval Bureau),

All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi, (ii)

Dy. Director, Public Grievance Redressal Cell, All India

Council for Technical Education, New Delhi, (iii) Dr. Ajeet

Singh, Regional Officer, Mumbai complaint about non-

deposit / withholding of monthly salary by the

Respondent No. 1. The Petitioner stated in the said

complaint that he is permanent employee of Respondent

 28

No. 1 with AICTE employee code No. 1-425538596.

Since the Petitioner was getting deficient salary to the

extent of 50%, the Petitioner along with his other

colleagues sent a legal notice to the management

through Advocate. The Petitioner further stated that in

reply to the legal notice, AICTE sent its response vide

letter dated 07th April 2022 directing Respondent No. 1

to resolve the issue. However, being aggrieved with legal

notice, the management kept his salary on hold. The

Respondent No. 8 herein, deposited salary of all other

teaching staff for the month of April 2021 on 03rd March

2022, May 2021 on 07th April 2022, June 2022 on 11th

April 2022, July 2021 on 20th April 2022, August 2021 on

22nd April 2022, September and October 2021 on 10th

May 2022 respectively excluding monthly salary of the

Petitioner. The Petitioner submits that the Respondents

and more particularly Respondent No. 8 deliberately

victimise the Petitioner and indiscriminately withhold the

salary of the Petitioner cause personal vendetta for

sending notice through Advocate. The Petitioner also

stated that the collage level Grievance Redressal

Committee (GRC) have accepted the grievance of the

Petitioner but have not given any resolution. The

Petitioner thus, requested for release of his monthly

salary or written clarification for holding of his salary.

 29

Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P - 19

Collectively are the copies of above referred letters

dated 16th May 2022.

xxx) The Petitioner submits that in reply, Dy. Director, Public

Grievances Redressal Commission, All India Counsel for

Technical Education, New Delhi vide its letter dated 7th

April 2022 advised the Director of Respondent No. 1 to

look into the grievances of the Petitioner, since there is a

mandatory inbuilt system within AICTE approved

institution for redressal of the grievances of staff,

student and faculty. Similarly, Joint Director, Technical

Education, Regional office, Amravati vide his letter dated

22nd March 2022 advise the Respondent No. 1 to look

into the advocate notice dated 03rd March 2022

regarding pending arrears of the Petitioner and submit

detailed report on the same. However, the Petitioner No.

1 did not act upon the same. Hereto annexed and

marked Annexure P – 20 and Annexure – P 21 are

the copies of above letters dated 7th April 2022 and

22nd March 2022 respectively.

xxxi) The Petitioner submits that since there is not action by

the Respondent No. 1, the Petitioner vide its letters

dated 17th April 2022 and 24th April 2022 again

requested the Joint Director, Technical Education,

 30

Regional office, Amravati to look into the indiscriminate

act of the Respondents and issue appropriate directions

the Respondent No. 1 to release his monthly withhold

salary from April 2021. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P - 22 Collectively are the copies of above

referred letters dated 17th April 2022 and 24th April

2022.

xxxii) The Petitioner thereafter, vide his letters dated 13th July

2022 and 15th July 2022, addressed to Secretary,

Maharashtra State Board of Technical Education, Mumbai

and Dy, Secretary, Maharashtra State Board of Technical

Education, Regional Office, Nagpur, complaint about

arbitrary withholding of salary by the Respondent No 8

herein for 07 months from April 2021 to October 2021.

The Petitioner further stated that the said Respondent

No 8 indiscriminately, released the salary of all the other

teaching staff excluding the Petitioner for the month of

April 2021 on 03rd March 2022, May 2021 on 07th April

2022, June 2022 on 11th April 2022, July 2021 on 20th

April 2022, August 2021 on 22nd April 2022, September

and October 2021 on 10th May 2022 respectively without

any reason. The Petitioner further stated that the

Petitioner approached Dr. Narendra Singh, Public

Grievance Redressal Cell, (PGRC), AICTE for necessary

 31

clarification. However, till date the Respondent No. 8

failed and neglected to provide satisfactory clarification

or taken any corrective action to release the complete

salary. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure – P – 23

collectively are the copies of above letters dated 13th

July 2022 and 15th July 2022 respectively.

xxxiii)The Petitioner submits that in spite of receipts of legal

notice from the Advocate and various of complaints

made before above referred competent authorities, the

Respondents and more particularly, the Respondent No.

8 continue to act unevenly manner with the Petitioner

and abruptly reduced the monthly salary without any

notice whatsoever, the Petitioner issued another legal

Notice dated 21st July 2022 through his Advocates

addressed to the Respondent No. 1 and Respondent No.

8, calling upon them to pay to the Petitioner and his

another colleague their pending salaries, arrears of

salaries, perks, applicable arrears of pay commission

and applicable DA with applicable simple bank interest

rate etc failing which the Petitioner would has no option

but to adopt appropriate legal action at their entire risk

as to cost and consequences.

xxxiv) The Petitioner also stated in the said notice dated

21st July 2022 that though the salary of the Petitioner

 32

was pending since April 2021, to the utter shocked and

surprised to the Petitioner, the Respondent No. 8

released the salary of the Petitioner for the month of

March 2022 and deposited in bank of account of the

Petitioner, almost 70% less salary amounting to Rs.

24,000/- as compared to monthly salary of Rs.84,000/-.

The Petitioner further stated in the said notice that act of

Respondent No. 8 to release the part salary as aforesaid

is nothing but attempted to fulfil MSBTE compliance

norms for affiliation without any intention to pay the

Petitioner’s pending dues in full and final satisfaction.

xxxv) The Petitioner also stated in the said Notice that the

Respondent No. 8 also given unevenly treatment to the

Petitioner by arbitrarily withholding his salary for the

month of April 2021, May 2021, June 2021, July 2021,

August 2021, September 2021 & October 2021 without

any reason and his knowledge. The Petitioner stated that

the Respondent No. 8 released and deposited salary for

the months of April 2021 on 22nd March, 2022, May

2021 on 7th April, 2022, June 2021 on 11th April, 2022,

July 2021 on 20th April, 2022, August 2021 on 22nd

April, 2022, September 2021 & October 2021, on 10th

May, 2022 to all the respective teaching staff deliberately

excluding the Petitioner without any reason whatsoever.

The Petitioner also approached Dr. Narendra Singh, Dy.

 33

Director (PGRC-Public Grievance & Redressal Cell) AICTE

for necessary clarification, however, the Respondent No.

8 failed and neglected to provide satisfactory clarification

or taken any corrective action to release the complete

salary.

xxxvi) The Petitioner also stated in the said Notice that

the Respondents, have given similar unevenly treatment

to his colleague Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar, MSBTE

approved staff, by reducing his salary arbitrarily without

his knowledge and following the due process of law. The

Petitioner further stated that immediately after noticing

such arbitrary act of reduction of salary, Prof. Ravikant

Haribhau Borkar, approached the Respondent No. 8

herein on 20th April 2022 by letter seeking written

clarification for the same, however, the Respondent No.

8 herein deliberately failed and neglected to reply the

said letter or taken any corrective steps and action to

restore the salary of Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar or

consider him for his yearly increment.

xxxvii) The Petitioner further stated in the said Notice that

even recently on 08th June 2022 Prof. Ravikant Haribhau

Borkar, along with other teaching staff and colleagues

were literally threaten by the Respondent No. 8 in the

name of “Bhushan Saheb” and/or “Bhushan Sir”, the

 34

Hon’ble Shri Justice Bhushan Gavai, the sitting Justice of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India, New Delhi under a

threat to suspend said Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar

from regular service to withdraw the complaint filed by

him and his other colleagues before the Regional

Employee Provident Fund Commissioner – II, Akola for

his legitimate EPF dues for a period from February 2012

till February 2017 almost for 60 months. The Petitioner

further stated due to such grave threat to withdraw the

EPF complaint by intimidating to terminate from regular

services by the Respondent No. 8 by depicting the name

of sitting Justice of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India,

the said Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar left with no

option but, to surrender his right and sign the letter

addressed to the Regional Provident Commissioner to

withdraw the EPF complaint filed in the month of May

2021 without resolving the same. The Petitioner further

stated that the Respondent No. 8 after successfully

achieving his pre-planned & ill-designed conspiracy to

fulfill his agenda by using the name of Lordship &

thereafter smartly asking for “Apology” on the WhatsApp

group & also declared that he, the Respondent No. 8

never had any talk with the said Lordship after

accomplishment of the agenda.

 35

xxxviii) The Petitioner further stated in the said Notice that

said illegal act of grave threatening by the Respondent

No. 8 herein, in the name of sitting Justice of Hon’ble

Supreme Court of India is nothing but insult of the

Hon’ble Supreme Court of India vis-à-vis the entire

judiciary system of India. The Petitioner further states

that immediately on such incident of illegal duress and

pressure in the name of prominent VIP & threat, the said

Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar filed a police complaint

on 10th June 2022 against the Respondent No. 8 before

the Kholapur Police Station, Taluka Bhatkhuli, District

Amravati to take a cognizance of such act. Hereto

annexed and marked Annexure P - 24 is a copy of

above legal notice dated 21st July 2022. Copies of said

notice was also marked to

_________________________ for appropriate direction /

action in the matter. The Petitioner also crave leave to

refer and rely upon copy of relevant WhatsApp messages

of the Respondent No. 8 and the proceedings of police

complaint filed by said Prof. Ravikant Haribhau Borkar,

as and when produced.

xxxix) The Petitioner submits that the Dy. Director,

(PGRC), All India Council of Technical Education, New

Delhi vide his letter dated 24th August 2022 informed

 36

the Respondent No. 1 that AICTE have not received any

reply to the earlier letters dated 07th April 2022 and 07th

June 2022 regarding release of pending salary of the

Petitioner. The said Dy. Director further advised the

Respondent No. 1 to look into the grievance of the

Petitioner and send action taken report at the earliest as

there is mandatory inbuilt system within AICTE approved

institution for Redressal of the grievance of staff, student

and faculty. Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P -

25 is copy of said letter dated 24th August 2022.

xl) The Petitioner thereafter, vide his letter dated 09th

September 2022 made another complaint to the Joint

Director, Technical Education Regional Office, Amaravati

regarding arbitrarily withholding of salary by the

Respondent No. 8 with copies to all concern competent

authorities and requested to take all necessary corrective

actions to release of withhold of salaries, payment of EPF

contributions and regularization of reduction of salary. In

reply, the said Dy. Director, Technical Education Regional

Office, Amaravati vide its letter dated 14th September

2022 advised the Respondent No. 8 to initiate

appropriate action against the captioned complaint and

submit report to him. Hereto annexed and marked

Annexure P – 26 Collectively are the copies of above

 37

letters dated 09th September 2022 and 14th September

2022.

xli) The Petitioner thereafter, vide his letters dated 13th

October 2022 addressed to (i) Dy. Director, Maharashtra

State of Technical Education, Regional office, Nagpur,

the Respondent No. 14 herein, (ii) Asst. Director (Tech),

Director of Technical Education office, Mumbai, (iii) Joint

Director, Technical Education Regional office, Amravati,

the Respondent No. 11 and vide another letter dated

14th October 2022 addressed to Dr. Ajeet Singh,

Regional Officer, Mumbai against Prof. M. M. Patil,

Principal (in charge with addl. Charge), being

Respondent No. 8 herein, about arbitrarily withholding of

salary of the Petitioner for 11 months from April 2021 to

February 2022 without any reason of whatsoever. The

Petitioner also pointed out that the said Respondent No.

8 has released and deposited salaries to all other

teaching staff deliberately excluding the Petitioner

without any reason. The Petitioner further stated that in

spite of several complaints against the Respondent No. 8

and failure on the part of the competent authorities to

take any effective action for a long period, the

Respondent No. 8 continues with his corrosive act of

sever harassment, which is gradually acquiring sharp

 38

ascending gravity day by day. The Petitioner further

stated that the said Respondent No. 8, deliberately

singled out the Petitioner and threatened that monthly

salary for the aforesaid months would be paid if the

Petitioner withdraw his name from the legal notice and

proceedings initiated by the Petitioner through his

Advocate. The Petitioner submitted that since joining in

last February 2022, the said Respondent No. 8, Principal

in charge with additional charge, continuously harassing

the Petitioner without any valid reason on various

occasions. The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner

protested in writing against the arbitrarily reduction of

salary and withholding of the salary and requested for

written clarification for his behaviour towards the

Petitioner and also sent legal notice, however, till date he

kept silent on the said complaints. The Petitioner submits

that such undue pressure and corrosive act by the

Respondent No. 8 is absolutely un-lawful and arbitrary,

which required to be investigated and process in

accordance with law. The Petitioner therefore, once

again requested all the competent authorities to take

immediate cognizance of his complaints and process in

accordance with law and AICTE, DTE, MSBTE rules and

regulations. However, till date no effective actions has

been initiated against the said Respondent No. 8 herein.

 39

Hereto annexed and marked Annexure P – 27

Collectively is copies of above letters dated letters

dated 13th October 2022 and 14th October 2022.

xlii) The Petitioner also stated that the Respondent No. 8 also

released the salary for the month of March 2022 on 13th

July 2022 after reduction of 70% just to fulfil MSBTE

compliance norms for affiliation without any intention to

pay the Petitioners pending salary in full and final

satisfaction. The Petitioner therefore, once again

requested all the competent authorities take all

necessary corrective actions to release of withhold

salaries, payment of EPF contribution and regularization

of reduction of salary.

xliii) The Petitioner submits that financial condition of

Respondent No 1 is strong enough and Respondent No 1

do not have any outstanding borrowings/loan/debt to be

paid to any financial institution or bank.

xliv) The Petitioner submits that Petitioner is the approved

employee by the competent authority i.e., Maharashtra

State Board of Technical Education and Petitioner’s

service conditions are governed by rules and regulation

of Government.
 40

xlv) The Petitioner submits that Respondent No.1 is having

sound financial condition and institutes like Kirti

Polytechnic, Uttam Nagar Amravati was started in 2013,

Kamalprakash Institute of Pharmacy and Research,

Kherda was started in year 2016 and Takshasheela

Mahavidyalaya, Yavatmal started in year 2020. All these

institutes require heavy financial investments. It is clear

that Respondent No.1 is having sound financial position

and trust at present managing more than 40 plus

educational institutions.

xlvi) The Petitioner submits that Respondent No.1 has not

paid salary and allowances for more than year during

Covid-19 pandemic to the Petitioner. It is submitted that

such action of the Respondent No. 1 is clear violation of

the letter No. AICTE/AB/Faculty Service/2020-21 Dated

5th May, 2021 by AICTE chairman. The letter in its point

number 2 payment of salary to faculty members clearly

states that there shall be no termination of faculty

without enough disciplinary ground & due process of

redressal Salary and other dues to the faculty/staff

members be released monthly on time and also

termination, if any, made during the lockdown be

withdrawn. This is to be compiled strictly. Hereto

annexed and marked Annexure P – 28 Collectively is

 41

the official communication letter No. AICTE/AB/Faculty

Service/2020-21 Dated 5th May 2021 by AICTE

chairman.

xlvii) The Petitioner submits that Respondent No.1 is bound by

the norms and regulations framed by the AICTE to

ensure the proper norms and standards to be maintained

in the technical institution, Respondent No.1 is bound by

the mandate issued by the State Government directing

even the non-aided institutions to make the revision of

pay-scale applicable from time to time.

xlviii) The Petitioner submits that that the determination of the

fee structure and the amount of the fee that could be

collected by respondent No.1 from the students is made

by the Fee Regulatory Authority (FRA in short formerly

known as Shikshan Shulka Samiti) and such a body is

bound under law and does in fact take into account the

various relevant factors in determining the fee structure.

It is, therefore, submitted that it is always open to the

managements to make an appropriate application before

Fee Regulatory Authority bringing all the relevant factors

to the notice of the body competent to determine the fee

structure and raise appropriate revenue.

 42

xlix) The Petitioner submits that the last pay revision was

approved by the management in year 2016 thereafter

management has periodically told the Petitioner that Shri

Dadasaheb Gawai Charitable Trust is facing financial

crisis. The Petitioner submits that Shri Dadasaheb Gawai

Charitable Trust has generated income to run the

concerned polytechnic on its own and, by legitimate

means like revision of fees, donations from

members/well-wishers more than 10,000 well-wishers.

l) The Petitioners submits that the private institutions

which aim at achieving high standards and excellence

which would achieve the same by ensuring and providing

for necessary infrastructure which would be conducive to

the growth of the institution and it can thus attain

excellence. Available infrastructure would bring within its

sweep the experienced and well qualified teaching staff

and the equipment, expenditure on administration and

maintenance as well as the reasonable surplus required

for growth and development of professional institutions.

Excellence can be achieved only if the infrastructure is

well arranged for. The infrastructure would be said to be

well arranged if it involves qualified and experienced

teaching staff. The AICTE which is apex body,

established for the purpose of proper planning and co-

ordinated development of the technical education system

 43

has prescribed the qualification to be possessed by the

teaching staff so as to bring uniformity in the quality of

infrastructure made available in such technical

institutions. AICTE is empowered to regulate the

maintenance of academic standard including the

atmosphere and the infrastructure. When the Apex body

like the AICTE is empowered to prescribed the

qualifications which would ensure the welfare of the

student community to promote merit, achieve excellence

and curb malpractice and exploitation. AICTE rules and

regulations are framed to reward the qualification so

acquired and possessed by prescribing a pay-scale. The

petitioners submit that it is mandatory for the

respondent to implement AICTE recommendations to

ensure the minimum standards to be possessed by the

teaching staff of the educational institutions imparting

technical education. The right to establish and manage

professional educational institutions cannot be claimed to

be in absolute terms but it is subject to reasonable

restrictions under clause (6) of Article 19.

li) The Petitioner submits that in fixing the fee structure of

an institution by FRA, following considerations are

material namely;

a) Infrastructure and facilities available;

 44

b) Investments made, salaries paid to the teachers

and staff;

c) Future planning for expansion and/or betterment of

institutions;

d) subject to two restrictions namely non profiteering

and non-charging of capital fees.

The Petitioner submits that a private institution like the

Respondent No. 1 is entitled to have its fee structure

determined by taking into consideration the aforesaid

variants and then the fees payable by the students would

cater to the salaries to be paid to the teachers and the

other staff. Thus, it is not as if the Respondent 1 will be

out of pocket if it disburses their arrears in order to

effectively implement the recommendations of the pay

revision, which is essentially necessary for the purpose of

maintaining the academic standard and the minimum

infrastructure of the educational institutions.

lii) The Petitioner submits that he has achieved higher

qualification like ME/Ph. D after appointment by

Respondent 1 and therefore he is eligible to get

increments as per DTE letter जावक क्रमांक ५ / तंशिस /

एमई एमटे क / २०२१/२११ दिनांक २५ मे २०२१. hereto annexed

 45

and marked Annexure P – 30 is the DTE letter जावक

क्रमांक ५ / तंशिस / एमई एमटे क / २०२१/२११ दिनांक २५ मे

२०२१.

6. The Petitioner submits that the Petitioner is appointed lawfully

by following due recruitment exercise and have completed

services for more than 12 years but no remuneration was paid

by the Respondent No. 1 to 9 by pay scale as per norms and

thus, the Petitioner is victimization by the Respondents and

less salary is being given to the Petitioner below than that of

pay scale as prescribed and not maintain the status of

employees like that of the Petitioner up to the mark by

releasing his difference of salary and regular salary. The

Petitioner submits that the grievances of the Petitioner are

completely neglected by the Respondents more specifically

Respondent No. 1 to 9. The Petitioner has given may request

letters / representations before resorting to the remedy of

filing Writ Petition before this Hon’ble Court.

7. The Petitioner submits that this Hon’ble Court in the matter of

Writ Petition No. 3240 of 2020 was pleased to allow the claim

of getting salary as per pay scale prescribed by way of interim

Order dated 16th February 2022 and also further Order is

passed in Writ Petition No. 343 of 2019 on 21st April 2022.

 46

The Petition submits that the case of the Petitioner is similar

with the above two cases and Orders. Hereto annexed and

marked Annexure P – 31 Collectively is Copy of Order

dated 16th February 2022 and Order dated 21st April 2022

passed in above two Petitions.

8. The Petitioner also submits that it is obligatory on the part of

the Respondents Nos. 9 to 13 to make inspections of record

No. 1 vis-à-vis record of Vikaramshit Polytechnic and make

appropriate assessment of arrears of difference of salary due

by deducting less salary paid to the Petitioner in outgoing 12

years and hence, the Respondent No 10 and 11 very well

verifying the lawful entitlement of the salary dues to be given

to the Petitioner as per pay scale prescribed including that of

making inspection of record of the Respondent No. 1 and vis-

à-vis Vikramshila Polytechnic regarding giving payment as per

as per scale prescribed.

9. That in view of the facts and circumstance mentioned above,

the Petitioner is constrained to invoke extra ordinary Writ

Jurisdiction by filing present Petition as last resort in the

absence of any remedy much less efficacious in view of the

complete failure on the part of the Respondents in their failure

in not doing justice by redressing the grievances of the

Petitioners as more particularly pointed out in written

communications. The Petitioner submits that it is a case of

 47

violation of the mandate of Article 14 that is right to equality

guaranteed under the Constitution of India. Hence, this

Petition.

10. The Petitioner submits that nothing is filed or pending in

any of the Courts of India as regards to subject matter of the

present Petition.

11. The Petitioner has not approached any other Court

including the Supreme Court of India in the present matter

any time before, seeking the reliefs as prayed for in this

Petition.

12. The Petitioner has no other alternate efficacious remedy,

save and except the present Petition.

13. The Petitioner submits that as per knowledge of the

Petitioner no caveat has been filed by the Respondents and

the Petitioner undertakes to supply the copy the Petition to

them if so directed by this Hon’ble Court.

14. The Petitioner undertake to file translated copies of

vernacular Annexures if so directed.

15. The Petition submits that no amicable settlement

between the Parties till the filing of the present Petition.

 48

16. The Petitioner has paid the requisite stamp duty of Rs.

______/-.

17. The Petitioner craves leave to alter, amend, delete any of

the aforesaid averment/s if necessary.

The Petitioner therefore prayed as under: -

a) That, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue Writ in the nature

of Mandamus or any other appropriate Writ, Order or

Directions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India

directing Respondents Nos. 1 to 8 to release the monthly

regular salary / arrears of salary as per pay scale prescribed in

6th Pay Commission declared by the Government of

Maharashtra from time to time up to 1st January 2016 from

date of approval to the Petitioner, who is MSBTE approved

employee of Vikramshila Polytechnic, run and managed by the

Respondent No. 1 through its Trustees, being Respondent No.

2 to 6 and Respondent No. 8, being Principal of Vikramshila

Polytechnic, having requisite approval and permission from

competent authorities and affiliation from the Respondent No.

15, Sant Gadge Baba Amravati University, Amravati;

b) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondents

Nos. 1 to 8 to release the monthly regular salary / arrears of

salary to the Petitioner as per pay scale prescribed in 7th Pay

Commission declared by the Government of Maharashtra from

 49

time to time with effect from 1st January 2016 onward till date

to the Petitioner;

c) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent 8,

being Principal of Vikramshila Polytechnic, to work out the

difference of salaries by deducting less the salary given to the

Petitioner than that of time to time pay scale prescribed for the

post of by All India Council of Technical Education from year

August 2010 onwards till and ordered to be paid to the

Petitioner at the earliest to avoid any further loss of justice;

d) That this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Respondent

No. 1 to 8 to Implementation of Carrier Advancement Scheme

(CAS) to all eligible employees including Petitioner;

e) By interim Orders, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct

Respondent No. 1 to 8 to release the regular salary to the

Petitioner in the pay scale prescribed in 7th pay commission

during the pendency of this Writ Petition;

f) By interim Orders, this Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct seize

security deposit kept with DTE and AICTE and give interim

relief.

g) For such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may

deem fit in the interest of justice;

 50

And for which act of kindness and justice the Petitioners shall

as in duty bound shall ever pray.

Submitted this on ______ day of November 2022.

High Court Mumbai.

Bench: Nagpur
Advocate for Petitioner.

VERIFICATION

I, Deepak Vinayak Shirbhate, aged about 47 years residing at

Rachana Residency, Wing No. 4, Plot No. 119, Ganediwal Layout,

Bhagyanagar Camp, Amravati-444602 and working for gain at

VIKRAMSHILA POLYTECHNIC Darapur, Tal. Daryapur, Dist.

Amravati, Maharashtra State - 444 802 do hereby state on solemn

affirmation that what is stated in paragraph No. ___ to ___ are true

to my knowledge and what is stated in paragraph No. ____ to ___

are legal submissions which I believe to be true and that stated in

paragraph are the consequential reliefs claimed in this Petition.

Solemnly affirmed at ______ )

This ___ day of November 2022 )

Advocate for Petitioner.

Before me,
51