Bombay High Court

SHOBHA SURESH DAGALEversusAbhijit Goel

Decided: 6 August 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: M S KARNIK S M MODAK

Holding

The petition is disposed as the order has been substantially complied with, with liberty granted to the petitioner to make a representation regarding the gratuity shortfall.

Summary

Satish Ramchandra Sangar filed a contempt petition against the Municipal Commissioner and the Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation alleging non‑compliance with a prior order. The court observed that the order had been substantially complied with, but noted a dispute regarding the amount of gratuity payable to the petitioner. The petitioner was granted liberty to submit a representation to the corporation explaining the shortfall and the calculations. The corporation was directed to consider the representation and decide on it expeditiously. Accordingly, the court disposed of the contempt petition.

Issues considered

Whether the respondents have complied with the earlier order in full.
Whether the dispute over the gratuity amount warrants further adjudication.

Subjects

contempt
gratuity
municipal corporation
order compliance
representation

Judgment

                                                                47-CP-112-2026-IN-WP-13511-2016.doc


                            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                    CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

SATISH                                CONTEMPT PETITION NO.112 OF 2026
RAMCHANDRA
SANGAR                                               IN
Digitally signed by                     WRIT PETITION NO.13511 OF 2016
SATISH RAMCHANDRA
SANGAR
Date: 2026.08.06
20:16:58 +0530
                      Shobha Suresh Dagale                                     ...Petitioner

                             V/s.
                      Abhijit Goel,
                      Municipal Commissioner,
                      Kalyan Dombivli Municipal Corporation,
                      Kalyan and Ors.                                          ...Respondents
                                                        *****
                      Mr.D.V.Deokar i/b. Mr.Sadik Pathan, Advocate for Petitioner.
                      Mr.A.S.Rao, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 to 3–Corporation.
                      Mr.P.P.Kakade, Addl.G.P. a/w Smt.P.B.Chavan, AGP, for Respondents
                      –State.
                                                        *****
                                               CORAM       :     M.S.KARNIK &
                                                                 S.M.MODAK, JJ.
                                               DATE        :     6th AUGUST 2026
                      P. C. :-

                      1.     Heard learned counsel for the Petitioner.

                      2.     The order which is breached has been complied with

                      substantially. Learned counsel for the Petitioner, however, submits that

                      there is some dispute about amount of gratuity. We grant liberty to the

                      Satish Sangar                                                              1/2
                                     47-CP-112-2026-IN-WP-13511-2016.doc


Petitioner to make a representation to the Respondent No.1–

Corporation pointing out the reason for the shortfall and the

calculations. If such a representation is preferred, the Respondent

No.1–Corporation to look into the said representation and take a

decision thereon expeditiously.

3.    The Petition is disposed of.




(S. M. MODAK, J.)                                (M. S. KARNIK, J.)




Satish Sangar                                                         2/2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…