pra-15wp-4869-2024.doc IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4869 OF 2024 Vidya Ramesh Patil … Petitioner V/s. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. … Respondents Mr. Y. B. Lengare (through V.C) with Mr. Rutik A. Kashid for the Petitioner. Ms. Tejas J. Kapre, AGP for the State. CORAM : MILIND N. JADHAV & NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ. DATED : JULY 22, 2026 P.C.: 1. Not on board. Upon mentioning, taken on board. 2. Heard Mr. Lengare, learned Advocate appearing for the Petitioner and Ms. Kapre, learned AGP for the State. 3. The impugned order dated 22nd June 2023, passed by Respondent No.2 - Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Region, Kolhapur, which is appended at Page No.160, Exhibit – ‘M’, in its operative part is, on the face of record, contradictory. Operative Clause No.1 of the said impugned order prima facie confirms the employment of the Petitioner prior to 1st November 2005 on a part-time basis; VRJ 1 VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Digitally signed by VAIBHAV RAMESH JADHAV Date: 2026.07.22 18:17:24 +0530 pra-15wp-4869-2024.doc however, therein reliance is placed upon the Government Resolution dated 31st October 2005 and the Education Department’s Government Resolution dated 29th November 2010, and the proposal of the Petitioner for considering her appointment for all benefits on a full-time basis is rejected. 4. The issue is no longer res integra in view of a series of decisions of this Court which are placed before us by the learned Advocate for the Petitioner, Mr. Lengare. One of the recent decisions is delivered by this Court in the case of Vanita Rajendra Bhadule v. State of Maharashtra, dated 25th June 2026, passed in Writ Petition (St.) No.18703 of 2024, having considered the issue with regard to grant of benefits to a part- time employee who has been appointed after following due process of law on a grant-in-aid basis prior to 1st November 2005. The reliance placed on the Government Resolution dated 31st October 2005 is also considered and the same has been negated by this Court. 5. In that view of the matter, the impugned order dated 22nd June 2023 passed by Respondent No.2 - Deputy Director of Education, Kolhapur Region, Kolhapur is quashed and set aside. 6. The Petition stands allowed in terms of prayer clauses (b), (c), (d), (e), and (f), which read thus: VRJ 2 pra-15wp-4869-2024.doc “[b] That this Hon’ble Court by an appropriate Writ, order or direction be pleased to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 22.06.2023 passed by the Respondent No. 2 and further be pleased to direct the Respondent No. 2 to forward the pension proposal of the Petitioner to the Respondent No. 3 and the Respondent No. 3 be directed to approve the pension proposal of the petitioner and release the pension and pensionary benefits. [c] That this Hon'ble Court by an appropriate Writ, Order or direction, be pleased to direct the Respondent No.1 to 5 to consider 50% services (7 Years 6 Months and 15 Days services) of Part Time Lecturer during the period from 15.06.1992 to 14.07.2007 with Full Time Lecturer from 15.07.2007 for the purpose of service benefits including pay fixation, increment, old pension and Senior Pay Scale, promotion and release the arrears of salary and ancillary benefits with 12% interest thereon. [d] That this Hon'ble Court by way of appropriate Writ, Order or Direction be pleased to hold and declare that the Petitioner is entitled for the pensionary benefits under the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, and Maharashtra Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1984 and existing General Provident Fund Scheme (GPF) and necessary direction be given to all the Respondents to extend the benefits of the Maharashtra Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1982, and Maharashtra Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1984 and existing General Provident Fund Scheme (GPF) to the Petitioner with all benefits payable thereunder. [e] That this Hon'ble Court by way of appropriate writ, order or direction, direct the Respondent No.4 and 5 to send the revised proposal of the Petitioner to the Respondent No.2 and 3 by considering 50% services (7 Years 6 Months and 15 days) with Full Time Services from 15.07.2007 for extending the benefit of the "Senior Pay Scale" (12 Years benefit) as per the GR dated 02.09.1989 and 12.06.2009 and further be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to consider the said proposal and release the benefit of "Senior Pay Scale" including the difference of arrears of salary. [f] That this Hon'ble Court by way of appropriate writ, order or direction be pleased to direct the Respondent No.2 to 5 to release and pay the amount deducted for DCPS Scheme Rs.15,20,462/- and NPS Scheme Rs.3,92,613.81 with accrued interest thereon forthwith.” 7. We direct that the aforesaid exercise of compliance with the directions contained in this order, as per the prayer clauses allowed, will be complied with by the concerned competent authority and the Education Officer/Deputy Director of Education within six weeks from VRJ 3 pra-15wp-4869-2024.doc today, positively, failing which liberty is given to the Petitioner to approach this Court and inform about any delay, if any. 8. The Petition is allowed and disposed of in the above terms. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) VRJ 4