Bombay High Court
SNEHAL SHANKAR GAVALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS.
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court held that the contempt petitions are disposed of, but the respondents must comply with the original order within four weeks, with liberty to revive the petitions upon non‑compliance.
Summary
The petitioners alleged contempt of the High Court’s earlier orders directing the State of Maharashtra to issue Shalarth IDs and include their names in the Shalarth pranali to enable salary release. The Court noted that the Shalarth IDs had been granted on 6 July 2026 and 7 August 2026, but the names had not been entered, and the salary bills were not submitted. It directed the Management and the Deputy Director of Education to take necessary steps within four weeks to release the grants and ordered the contempt petitions to be disposed of. The Court retained the power to revive the proceedings if compliance is not achieved. The judgment thus dismissed the contempt petitions while mandating compliance with the original salary‑release order.
Issues considered
- Did the respondents commit contempt by failing to issue Shalarth IDs and include petitioners' names as ordered?
- Is the Court entitled to dismiss the contempt petitions despite partial compliance?
- What remedial steps must the Management and Deputy Director take to ensure salary release?
Subjects
- contempt of court
- salary release
- Shalarth ID
- compliance
- high court order
- administrative law
Judgment
910-CP-67-2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 67 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12408 OF 2025
Appa Balbhim Thorat ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 93 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12556 OF 2025
Nitin Vishnu Hembade ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 94 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12557 OF 2025
Sanjay Baloo Bhuse ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 95 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12297 OF 2025
Snehal Shankar Gavali ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra and Others ...Respondents.
Gaikwad RD 1 of 3
910-CP-67-2026.doc
WITH
CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 96 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO. 12292 OF 2025
Akash Pandurang Salunkhe ...Petitioner.
Versus
The State Of Maharashtra And Others ...Respondents.
——————
Mr. Prashant S. Bhavake for the Petitioner.
Mr. Siddheshwar B. Kalel, AGP, for the Respondents-State.
——————
Coram : Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
Date : August 21, 2026.
P. C. :
1. By the present group of Contempt Petitions, contempt was
alleged of the orders passed by this Court directing the Respondents to
issue the shalarth ID and include the names of the Petitioners in the
shalarth pranali, which would enable to release the salary of the
Petitioner.
2. Without going into issue as to whether the timeline was adhered
to, as the Shalarth IDs have now been granted on 6th July 2026 and 7th
August 2026, it would be appropriate if the contempt petitions are
disposed of. The contention sought to be raised by the learned AGP is
that the Management has not submitted the salary bills, whereas the
contention of Mr. Bhavake is that it was for the Deputy Director to
Gaikwad RD 2 of 3
910-CP-67-2026.doc
include the names of the Petitioners in the shalarth pranali, which is not
even done. It is expected that necessary steps will be taken within a
period of four weeks from today by the Management as well as the
Deputy Director of Education, so that the grants can the released to the
Petitioners.
3. The Contempt Petitions stand disposed of in the above terms.
4. In event of non-compliance, liberty to revive the cause.
[Neeraj P. Dhote, J.] [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]
Digitally
signed by
RAJU
RAJU DATTATRAYA
DATTATRAYA GAIKWAD
GAIKWAD Date:
2026.08.21
19:46:11
+0530
Gaikwad RD 3 of 3
Checking your session…