Bombay High Court
DILIP NANA RANDIVEversusSUNANDA WAKHARE
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The contempt petition is disposed of as the respondent has shown compliance with the pension order, with liberty granted to the petitioner to revive the proceedings if compliance is not completed.
Summary
The petitioner, Dilip Nana Randive, filed a contempt petition alleging non‑compliance with a pension payment order dated 6 December 2023. The High Court had earlier, on 29 July 2026, granted the respondent a last opportunity to purge the contempt. Respondent No.4, through Addl. Govt. Pleader O. A. Chandurkar, placed on record letters from the Pay & Provident Fund Squad indicating that the pension order had been granted and that necessary forms had been submitted to the Treasury. The petitioner’s counsel, Rahul Kadam, accepted that compliance appeared to have been achieved but reserved the right to approach the Court if the pension was not released. The Court, satisfied with the evidence of compliance, disposed of the contempt petition while granting the petitioner liberty to revive the proceedings should the orders not be fully implemented. The petition was dismissed without costs and the Court directed that any remaining formalities be completed within two weeks.
Issues considered
- Whether the respondent has complied with the pension payment order of 6 December 2023, thereby negating the alleged contempt.
- Whether the contempt petition should be dismissed or continued in view of the alleged compliance.
Subjects
- contempt
- pension order
- compliance
- civil appellate jurisdiction
- revival of proceedings
- last opportunity
- court order
Judgment
Digitally
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS
VILAS RANE CP419-24.DOC
RANE Date:
2026.09.07
18:31:34
+0530
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 419 OF 2024
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.14880 OF 2022
Dilip Nana Randive ...Petitioner
Vs.
Sunanda Wakhare ...Respondent
_________
Mr. Rahul Kadam with Vedant Babar, for Petitioner.
Mr. O. A. Chandurkar, Addl.Govt.Pleader with Ms. D. S. Deshmukh, AGP for the State-
Respondent Nos.1 to 4.
__________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
M. M. SATHAYE, JJ.
(In Chamber At 5.15 p.m.)
DATE: 31 AUGUST 2026.
P.C.
1. This contempt petition is listed today on the backdrop of order dated 29
July 2026 passed by this Court whereby a last opportunity was granted by this
Court to the contemnor to purge the contempt. Mr. Chandurkar, learned AGP, on
instructions of respondent No.4 – contemnor, has placed on record a
communication of Mr. Sanjay Gambhire, Superintendent, Office of Pay &
Provident Fund Squad, Pune-1, addressed to Deputy Secretary, School Education
Department, Mantralay, Mumbai, inter alia stating that the petitioner has already
been granted Pension Payment Order (PPO No. M-112603702799) and further
appropriate steps are being taken to grant pension to the petitioner in compliance
of the order dated 6 December 2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court
of which contempt is alleged. The said letter also records that due to some
technical difficulties in regard to the website at Accountant General’s Office, the
Page 1 of 2
31 August 2026
P. V. Rane
CP419-24.DOC
GPO/PPO form has been received in office of the Superintendent on 24 August
2025 and on the same day the Forms ‘A’,’B’ and ‘C’, MTR-42, were submitted to
the Treasurey with a request to release the pension immediately. Mr. Chandurkar
states that these formalities shall be soon completed. Also a letter dated 24 August
2026 addressed by Dr. Bhausaheb Karekar, Education Officer (Secondary), Pay
and PPF Squad, Pune to the Senior Treasury Officer, Pune Treasury, has been
placed on record in relation to the completing of the formalities to grant pension
to the petitioner.
2. Mr. Kadam, learned Counsel for the petitioner also states that there is
compliance of the order. He also submits that, in the event, further appropriate
steps are not taken and the petitioner is not granted pension, then the petitioner
may be permitted to make an application to the Court. We agree with Mr. Kadam.
3. In this view of the matter, we are not inclined to proceed further in the
present contempt petition. The contempt petition is, accordingly, disposed of, by
taking on record the letters dated 31 August 2026 and 24 August 2026 as noted
by us hereinabove. However, we grant liberty to the petitioner to revive the
proceedings in case the orders are not complied with letter and spirit.
4. Let all the remaining formalities be completed within a period of two
weeks from today.
5. The contempt petition is accordingly disposed of. No costs.
(M. M. SATHAYE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 2 of 2
31 August 2026
P. V. Rane
Checking your session…