Bombay High Court

Pradeep Ramchandra ShindeversusSujata Saunik

Decided: 28 April 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off
Bench: RAVINDRA V GHUGE HITEN SHAMRAO VENEGAVKAR

Holding

The court ordered the respondents to issue a reasoned order within 15 days and disposed of the contempt petitions by consent.

Summary

Petitioners Kailas Bhima Gunjal & Anr. and Pradeep Ramchandra Shinde & Anr. filed contempt petitions alleging that the State of Maharashtra had failed to issue reasoned orders on their eligibility for National/State teaching awards. The respondents, senior officials of the Rural Development Department and the Education Department, submitted affidavits of apology and explained that two separate Government Resolutions (dated 04/09/2014 and 04/09/2018) governed eligibility in different categories. The court held that the respondents must pass a clear, reasoned order within 15 days and circulate copies to the concerned Zilla Parishads. The court further directed that the aggrieved petitioners could seek any further legal remedy thereafter. On the basis of the court’s direction, both contempt petitions were disposed of by consent.

Issues considered

What constitutes contempt when a government department fails to pass a reasoned order as directed by a court?
Whether the court can compel the issuance of a reasoned order within a specified time frame.

Subjects

contempt of court
reasoned order
government department
eligibility awards
high court
writ petition

Judgment

                                                                   927-928-CP-31-2026.odt



                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

                                       CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                      CONTEMPT PETITION NO.31 OF 2026
       Digitally
       signed by                                    IN
       SONALI
SONALI MILIND                          WRIT PETITION NO. 6134 OF 2021
MILIND PATIL
PATIL  Date:
       2026.04.29
       11:20:17     Kailas Bhima Gunjal & Anr.                     ….Petitioners
       +0530

                             Versus
                    Rajesh Kumar Mina.
                    Chief Secretary,
                    Government of Maharashtra & Ors.               ….Respondents

                                                   WITH
                                      CONTEMPT PETITION NO.32 OF 2026
                                                    IN
                                       WRIT PETITION NO. 13154 OF 2022

                    Pradeep Ramchandra Shinde & Anr.               ….Petitioners
                             Versus
                    Sujata Saunik
                    Chief Secretary,
                    Government of Maharashtra & Ors.               ….Respondents


                    Mr. Suresh Pakale, Senior Advocate a/w. Mr. Nilesh Desai, for the
                    Petitioners in both CPs.
                    Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. GP a/w. Mr. V. G. Badgujar, AGP for
                    the Respondent – State in CP/31/2026.
                    Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl. GP a/w. Mr. S. P. Kamble, AGP for the
                    Respondent – State in CP/32/2026.
                    Mr. Eknath Dawale, Respondent No.3-Principal Secretary, Rural
                    Development Department in CP/31/2026 and CP/32/2026, is present
                    in Court.
                    Mr. Mahesh Palkar, Respondent No.4-Director of Education
                    (Secondary), Pune, in CP/31/2026, is present in Court.

                    Sonali                          1 of 4
                                                  927-928-CP-31-2026.odt



Mr. Sampat Suryawanshi, Respondent No.4-Joint Secretary,
(Revenue & Forest) Relief and Rehabilitation (the then Director of
Education (Secondary)) in CP/32/2026, is present in Court.


                         CORAM : RAVINDRA V. GHUGE
                                           &
                                 HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

                         DATE      : 28th APRIL, 2026

P.C.:

1.          We have heard the learned Senior Advocate for the

Petitioners and the learned Additional Government Pleader, on

behalf of the State. Respondent No.3, Shri Eknath Dawale, Principal

Secretary, Rural Development Department, Respondent No.4, Shri

Mahesh Palkar, Director of Education (Secondary), Pune in

Contempt Petition No.31 of 2026 and Respondent No.4, Shri

Sampat Suryawanshi, Joint Secretary, (Revenue & Forest), Relief

and Rehabilitation (the then Director of Education (Secondary)) in

Contempt Petition No.32 of 2026, are present in the Court Hall.



2.          The learned Additional Government Pleader has

tendered the affidavits of apology of Respondent Nos.3 and 4, with

pagination. The same are taken on record.




Sonali                           2 of 4
                                                   927-928-CP-31-2026.odt



3.             The learned Additional Government Pleader submits

that the G.R. dated 04/09/2014 issued by the Education Department

pertains to the candidates who were found eligible for the National

or State Awards for exceptional service in the teaching sector. The

second G.R. dated 04/09/2018 has been issued by the Rural

Development Department, which is restricted only to the teachers

working at the District places. Both the G.R.s apply in two different

fields. These Petitioners are not found eligible for the District

Awards, prior to the cut-off date. The verification has been done by

these Respondents and they will pass a reasoned order making out a

clear distinction which would give eligible and non-eligible

Petitioners an idea as regards their status of eligibility/non-

eligibility.



4.             He submits on instructions of Shri Eknath Dhawale,

Principal Secretary, Rural Development Department and Shri

Mahesh Palkar, Director of Education (Secondary), Pune that such

reasoned order would be passed within 15 days from today, copies

would be sent to the Zilla Parishads which sent the proposals. We

record the said statement and direct that the aggrieved Petitioners

would be at liberty to avail of a remedy as is permissible in law for


Sonali                           3 of 4
                                                    927-928-CP-31-2026.odt



seeking redressal of their grievance. All contentions of all the

stakeholders are kept open.



5.           In view of the above order, both these Contempt

Petitions are disposed off, by consent.




(HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, J.)                  (RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, J.)




Sonali                            4 of 4

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…