Bombay High Court
SANDIP GANPAT HADBAL AND ORS.versusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The interim order of 29 November 2024 remains valid and the Zilla Parishad must ensure its continuous compliance, leading to the disposal of the contempt petition.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of teachers, filed a contempt petition alleging that the Zilla Parishad of Palghar had failed to pay their salaries despite a court order dated 29 November 2024 directing payment. The respondents submitted an affidavit stating that they were in the process of compiling service records and calculating differential amounts, which was time‑consuming. The petitioners argued that once the court order was issued, they should not have to repeatedly approach the court to obtain their salaries. The bench held that the interim order of 29 November 2024 remains valid and subsisting, and that the Chief Executive Officer of the Zilla Parishad is duty‑bound to comply with it continuously. Although the court noted that the respondents had taken steps towards compliance, it declined to proceed with the contempt petition, directing the CEO to ensure prompt payment and warning that any future default would constitute contempt. The contempt petition was therefore disposed of without costs, and the writ petition was listed for admission on 16 September 2026.
Issues considered
- Whether the Zilla Parishad’s delay in paying salaries constitutes contempt of the court’s interim order dated 29 November 2024
- Whether the court may dismiss the contempt petition on the basis that the order has been complied with or is being complied with
Subjects
- contempt of court
- court order compliance
- salary payment
- Zilla Parishad
- interim order
- civil appellate jurisdiction
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
PRAJAKTA
906-CP [email protected]
PRAJAKTA SAGAR
SAGAR VARTAK
VARTAK Date:
2026.09.05
11:54:24
+0530
Prajakta Vartak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 10 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 13177 OF 2023
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 13177 OF 2023
Sandip Ganpat Hadbal & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO. 435 OF 2026
________
Ms. Pradnya Talekar with Ms. Madhavi Ayyappan i/b. Talekar & Associates for
Petitioners.
Mr. P. P. Kakade, Addl. G. P. with Mr. V. G. Badgujar, AGP for State.
Mr. Abhinandan Vagyani i/b. Mr. C. M. Lokesh for Respondent No.2.
_________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 03 SEPTEMBER 2026.
P.C.
1. This contempt petition is filed by the petitioners alleging non-compliance
with the order dated 29 November 2024 passed by this Court on Interim
Application No. 1418 of 2024 filed in the aforesaid writ petition, inasmuch as the
respondent/Zilla Parishad had not made payment of salary to the petitioners as
directed by this Court.
2. We had heard the proceedings on the earlier occasion. Today, Mr. Vagyani,
learned counsel for the Zilla Parishad, has placed on record an affidavit of Mr.
Manoj Vijay Ranade, who is working as the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla
Page 1 of 3
03 September 2026
906-CP [email protected]
Parishad, Palghar, to contend that the order has been complied with. The said
affidavit is taken on record. The relevant contents of the said affidavit are
required to be noted, which read thus:-
“2. I say that the present Affidavit is being filed in response to the
notice issued by this Hon'ble Court and for placing on record the steps taken
by Respondent No.2 for implementation of the directions issued by this
Hon'ble Court from time to time in the above proceedings. I say that the
present Affidavit is being filed in compliance with the directions issued by
this Hon'ble Court vide Order dated 05.05.2026 passed by the Hon'ble
Division Bench comprising Hon'ble Shri Justice Ravindra V. Ghuge and
Hon'ble Shri Justice M.M. Sathaye in the above matter.
6. I say that immediately after receipt of the directions issued by this
Hon'ble Court, the matter was placed before the concerned departments and
officers of Zilla Parishad, Palghar for examination and implementation. The
Education Department was directed to collect service particulars of all
eligible teachers, verify their continuity of service, determine the applicable
pay structure, prepare calculations of differential amounts payable and assess
the total financial burden arising out of the implementation of the
directions.
7. I say that the process of implementation required compilation of
data from various schools situated in different talukas of Palghar District.
Service records, attendance records, periods of engagement and details
regarding honorarium already paid were required to be verified and
reconciled. The exercise was time-consuming and involved coordination
amongst various officers and institutions.”
3. The grievance as urged by Ms. Talekar, learned counsel for the petitioners,
is that despite the clear orders passed by this Court from time to time, the
petitioners are required to wait for the respondent/Zilla Parishad to make
payment of their salaries. It is her submission that once the Court has passed
orders, the petitioners ought not be required to approach the Court in such
proceedings. She submits that only when such proceedings are filed, the payment
was being made by the Zilla Parishad, which is not the object and intention of
what was directed by this Court.
Page 2 of 3
03 September 2026
906-CP [email protected]
4. We find substance in the contention as urged by Ms. Talekar. We find that
the interim order dated 29 November 2024 is valid and subsisting and, hence, the
Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, would be duty bound to comply with the
said order for as long as it continues to operate.
5. In the aforesaid circumstances, although we do not intend to take forward
the contempt petition, as the orders have been complied with, we direct the Chief
Executive Officer to ensure compliance with the orders so that the petitioners are
not required to time and again initiate proceedings for receiving their basic
salaries.
6. Needless to observe that such position needs to continue. Any default in
making payment of salary, despite the subsistence of the order dated 29
November 2024, would amount to aggravation of the contempt, of which the
Chief Executive Officer shall take note.
7. With the aforesaid observations and recording compliance for the present,
we dispose of the contempt petition. No costs.
8. List the writ petition for admission on 16 September 2026 (H.O.B.).
(Dr.NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 3 of 3
03 September 2026
Checking your session…