Bombay High Court
NAVI MUMBAI MUNICIPAL CORPORATIONversusDHANRAJ LAXMAN PAWAR AND ORS
- Decided
- Disposal
- Disposed Off
Holding
The Court vacated the ad‑interim protection for contract appointees, permitting NMMC to continue its recruitment, and directed the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development Department to decide on the regularisation of the contract employees within four weeks.
Summary
The Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation (NMMC) sought to resume its recruitment process for 499 posts advertised on 27 March 2025, arguing that earlier ad‑interim orders protecting long‑serving contract appointees were causing prejudice to the corporation’s functioning. The petitioners, who had been working on contract for 15‑20 years, contended that they should be regularised before any fresh recruitment and that the ad‑interim protection should remain. The Court noted earlier orders directing the State Government to decide on regularisation as a one‑time measure and observed that the affidavit filed by a Deputy Secretary was defective. It held that the ad‑interim protection could be vacated as the contract employees’ status would not be disturbed, allowing NMMC to proceed with the selection. The Court further directed the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development Department to record the final decision on regularisation within four weeks. The interim applications were consequently disposed.
Issues considered
- Whether the ad‑interim orders protecting contract appointees should continue pending their regularisation.
- Whether NMMC may proceed with its recruitment without prejudice to the rights of long‑serving contract employees.
- Whether the State Government is obligated to decide on the regularisation of contract appointees as a one‑time measure.
- Whether the Court can direct the Principal Secretary to file an affidavit reflecting the decision on regularisation.
Subjects
- recruitment
- regularisation
- contract employees
- municipal corporation
- interim relief
- Article 243W
- state government direction
Judgment
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
rsk
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
INTERIM APPLICATION (ST) NO.21054 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.4932 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
Raghavendra Namdev Pastey And Ors ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6459 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.2608 OF 2026
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
Bhavesh Chintaman Khapare And Ors ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6463 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.15957 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
Dhanraj Laxman Pawar and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6457 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.13493 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
Sachin Umakant Namwad and Ors. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6458 OF 2026
Digitally signed
by RAJESHWARI
IN
RAJESHWARI SUBODH
SUBODH KARVE
KARVE Date:
2026.08.28
12:06:25 +0530
Page 1 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
WRIT PETITION (ST) NO.39077 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
Shiwai Amol Deshmukh and Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6460 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.3061 OF 2026
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
State of Maharashtra thr. Its Secretary Urban
Development & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6461 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.5319 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
State of Maharashtra thr. Its Secretary Urban
Development & Anr. ...Respondents
WITH
INTERIM APPLICATION NO.6462 OF 2026
IN
WRIT PETITION NO.16886 OF 2025
Municipal Commissioner Navi Mumbai Municipal
Corporation …. Applicant
Vs
State of Maharashtra thr. Its Secretary Urban
Development & Anr. ...Respondents
_________
Mr. Anil Sakhare, Sr. Adv. a/w Mr. Tejesh Dande, Mr. Bharat Gadhavi, Mr. Aniket
Shitole, Mr. Vinayak Shelar i/b Tejesh Dande for Applicant – Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation.
Officers :- Mr. Kisanrao Palande, Deputy Municipal Commissioner & Mr. Jay
Jagdale, Senior Clerk
Mr. Sayyed Tauseef Yaseen for Petitioner in WP/4932/2025 & WP/3061/2026
Page 2 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
(Not On Board)
Dr. Uday P. Warunjikar a/w Mr. Sumit Kate and Ms. Sonali R. Chavan for
Petitoner in WP/5319/2025.
Mr. Vishwajeet Kapse a/w Mr. Pawan Tiwari for Petitioner in
WP(ST)/13493/2025.
Mr. Prashant P. Chavan, Sr. Adv. a/w Mr. Ravindra R. Chile i/b Navdeep Vora &
Asso. For Petitioner in WP(ST)/39077/2025.
Mr. Sangharsh V. Waghmare for Interveners in IAST/9597/2026 in
WP/4932/2025.
Mrs. T. N. Bhatia, AGP for State.
__________
CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 19 AUGUST 2026.
P.C.
1. We have eight Interim Applications which are filed by the Navi Mumbai
Municipal Corporation (NMMC)-Respondent. These applications are on the
backdrop of the orders which were passed from time to time in the present
proceedings and more particularly, initially in view of the statement which was
made on behalf of the NMMC qua the recruitment process being undertaken by
it under the advertisement dated 27 March 2025 and corrigendum dated 29 th
April 2025. Under the said advertisement, the NMMC advertised 658 posts from
class C and class D with respect of 30 cadres. The petitioners in all these eight
applications had approached this Court contending that they were contract
appointees and who had been continued by the NMMC by the time to time
renewal of their contracts for a substantially long period between 15 to 20 years.
It is, hence, their contention that the recruitment process being undertaken under
the advertisement would prejudicially affect them and would take away their
rights of employment with the NMMC, which they are presently enjoying
Page 3 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
although under a prolonged contractual arrangement. Their plea is that they
ought to have been regularized and without their regularization, no steps could
have been taken by the NMMC to undertake any regular selection. The basis of
the present applications are the orders which were passed by the Division Bench
on the earlier occasion. We are hence required to note the details of order dated 6
May 2025. On 6 May 2025 a co-ordinate Bench of this Court passed the
following order:
1. The Petitioner No.4 in Writ Petition No.5319 of 2025, seeks leave to
delete his name from the array of the Petitioners since he has already
preferred Writ Petition (St) No.13493 of 2025. Liberty granted. The name
be deleted.
2. Issue notice to the Respondents, returnable on 25th June, 2025. The
learned Additional G.P. waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent
No.1. The learned Advocate Mr. Dande waives service of notice on behalf of
their respective Respondents.
3. Let the affidavits in reply be filed, at least ten days, prior to the returnable
date.
4. The Petitioners have tendered a chart in the pleadings in the Petitions,
indicating that many of them have been working since 2009. Two persons
have been working since 2006 and 2007. An advertisement is not published
to recruit fresh hands in their places. We are informed that the last date for
the Applicants (from the public at large), would be 11th May, 2025.
5. To balance the equities, we direct that these Petitioners, in view of the age
relaxation granted by Respondent No.2, would make their applications for
the said posts without prejudice to their rights. Until further orders, the
service conditions of these Petitioners would not be altered without the leave
of the Court.
(emphasis added)
2. Thereafter, a co-ordinate Bench of this Court on 18 August 2025
continued the order dated 6 May 2025 by the following order:
1. At the request of the learned counsel for the petitioner(s), post the matter on
15th September 2025.
2. Reply, if any, to be filed by the respondents in the meantime.
3. The ad-interim relief granted by the order dated 6th May 2025 shall continue
to operate till the next date of hearing.
Page 4 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
3. By a further order dated 25 August 2025 passed by a co-ordinate Bench,
the Court in paragraph 3 recorded a statement made on behalf of the NMMC
that till the next date of hearing, the score-cards shall not be published. The said
order reads as under:
“1. Mr. Tejash Dande, the learned counsel for respondent nos.2 and 3 – Navi
Mumbai Municipal Corporation states that a reply affidavit is ready and that
shall be filed by tomorrow.
2. Dr. Uday Warunjikar, the learned counsel for the petitioners in Writ
Petition No.5319 of 2025 states that the respondent-Municipal Corporation
is likely to publish the score-card by 26th August 2025.
3. However, Mr. Tejash Dande, the learned counsel appearing for Navi
Mumbai Municipal Corporation makes a statement on instructions that till
the next date of hearing, the score-card shall not be published. 4. Post the
matter on 10th September 2025 at 3:30 p.m.”
(emphasis added)
4. By a further order dated 23 September 2025 the aforesaid orders
continued to operate.
5. On the aforesaid backdrop, the present Interim Applications are filed by
the NMMC praying for the following substantive reliefs. For convenience, we
note the prayers as made in the First Interim Application * which read as under:-
“a) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to grant permission to
Applicant / Navi Mumbai Municipal Corporation to proceed with the
recruitment process pursuant to the Advertisement dated 27.03.2025 and
Corrigendum dated 29.4.2025 in respect of 499 posts, without causing any
adverse impact on the claims of the Petitioner, as specified in the chart at Exh
B;
b) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to modify/clarify the
statement recorded in the Order dated 25.08.2025 passed by this Hon'ble
Court (Coram: Shree Chandrashekar & Aarti Sathe, JJ) suitably;
c) Any other and further Orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and
proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
* Interim Application (st) 21054 of 2026
Page 5 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
6. We have heard learned counsel for the parties on the present Interim
Applications. Mr. Sakhare, learned Senior Advocate for the applicant-NMMC
would submit that a serious prejudice is being caused to the Municipal
Corporation by the continuation of the ad-interim orders passed by this Court.
We note that the Municipal Corporation is in an urgent need to complete the
selection process in question, failing which the functioning of the NMMC stands
adversely affected. He submits that insofar as the contract appointees like the
petitioners are concerned, they belong to two cadres. He states that insofar as the
other cadres in respect of which the petitioners are not concerned, qua which the
selection procedure has already been initiated, which are stated to be 15 cadres,
the selection process needs to be taken forward and appointments be made. Mr.
Sakhare on instructions also makes a statement that insofar as the contract
appointees are concerned which includes the petitioners, their appointments in no
manner would be disturbed by the selection process being undertaken as the post
being filled are of the cadres with which the petitioners are not concerned. It is
hence his contention that in this view of the matter, the ad-interim protection
granted by the earlier orders (supra) needs to be vacated.
7. On behalf of the petitioners, the primary contention is to the effect that
the petitioners considering their long service with the NMMC as contract
appointees would be required to be regularized. In such context, on behalf of the
petitioners, our attention is drawn to an to the order dated 10 December 2025,
passed by the Division Bench in Writ Petition No.4932 of 2025 and connected
matters in in which considering the rival contentions and the settled position in
Page 6 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
law, in regards to the right being created in favour of the contract appointees on
account of their long continuation in the services of the NMMC, the Court
directed the State Government to take an appropriate decision qua their regular
appointment. In paragraph 12 of the said order, the Division Bench directed that
the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development Department shall consider the
said issue. The Court recommended that the said authority shall place the subject
before the highest authority in the said Department for a well thought decision on
the issue as to whether the 479 persons (contract appointees) can be considered
for regularization, depending upon the sanctioned posts on which they could be
accommodated, having discharged duties in the same department for same
activity as a one time scheme. Such order ought to have been taken to its logical
conclusion by the State Government considering such direction as made by the
Court. The said proceedings were adjourned for a period of four weeks so that the
Principal Secretary, Urban Development Department would place a road map
before the Court to indicate as to how this issue and the reference made by the
Court were to be dealt with, more so in the light of the earlier efforts made by the
Corporation to regularize the employees.
8. Thus, the intention of the NMMC was to regularize the services of these
persons, however, subject to the decisions of the State Government.
9. In the light of the above directions of this Court, to our dismay,
Mrs.Sushila Dhondiram Pawar, working as Deputy Secretary of the Government
of Maharashtra in Urban Development Department has placed on record a reply
affidavit dated 3 February 2026. We are quite surprised as to how, once the High
Page 7 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
Court had issued categorical directions, an affidavit could have been filed by the
Deputy Secretary. This apart the Deputy Secretary has not dealt with the clear
observations which were made by the Court as to the position which the State
Government would take insofar as the regularization of the contract appointees
was considered and more particularly, considering the principles of law which
have been discussed in the order dated 10 December 2025 passed by the Division
Bench. Thus, the affidavit is fundamentally a defective affidavit. It should not
have been filed. The affidavit ought to have been filed only by the Principal
Secretary after applying his mind to the serious concerns which were echoed by
the Division Bench in its order dated 10 December 2025 and as a one time
scheme. In this view of the matter, we are constrained to direct the Principal
Secretary to place on record an affidavit in compliance of the order dated 10
December 2025 passed by this Court which needs to be adhered, in letter and
spirit. Considering the settled position in law as referred to in paragraph 11 of the
said order a one time decision needs to be taken by the State Government. This
more particularly considering the Constitutional scheme of Article 243W of the
Constitution of India, under which the powers, authority and responsibility of the
municipal bodies, which are local self government, stand reflected.
10. Thus considering the principles that the NMMC is an institution of self-
government within the meaning and purview of Article 243W of the
Constitution of India with the powers and the autonomy of a local self-
government it wields, certainly a decision as taken by the NMMC, was required to
be respected by the State Government. The State Government was required to
Page 8 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
consider the principles of law as laid down by the Supreme Court in respect of
long contractual appointments and as specifically referred to in the order dated 10
December 2025. Also, it is within the domain of the authority, power and
responsibility of the NMMC, to ascertain the manpower requirement and
accordingly establish its own staffing pattern in making appointments for the
functioning of the local self-government. Needless to observe that the State
Government is not concerned with the funding of these posts, as the posts are
required to be catered, serviced and funded by the Municipal Corporation
without any financial burden on the Municipal Corporation, hence, in the event
on this count when the NMMC has taken all steps which are not arbitrary, when
there is no illegality affecting public interest, the petitioner would be correct, that
the State Government ought not to obstruct the NMMC in its decision to
regularize the longstanding contract appointees. We would expect the State
Government therefore to apply its mind on these issues considered in the orders
passed by this Court in taking the decision as a one time measure. Let such
decision be taken and placed on record on the adjourned date of hearing and an
affidavit to that effect be filed by the Principal Secretary.
11. Insofar as the selection process initiated is concerned, we find that it has
been quite some time since the selection process has commenced, it has reached
the final stage and the same needs to be taken forward as it involves several cadres
including cadres with which the petitioners are not concerned. The NMMC is
correct in its contention that there would be prejudice caused to the Municipal
Corporation, in the event the appointments are not made at an early date, as the
Page 9 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
day to day functioning of the NMMC is affected in the appointments being not
finalised. This would also be prejudicial to several candidates who have applied
for these posts and who are now part of the selection procedure.
12. Mr. Sakhare on behalf of the NMMC, on instructions, has take a fair stand
that as the decision is pending with the State Government in regard to the
contract appointees to be regularized as a one time measure, as decided by the
NMMC, we are of the opinion that no prejudice would be caused to the
petitioners or any contract appointees as the status of their present employment is
not being disturbed, we are inclined to dispose of this Interim Application by the
following order:
ORDER
1. We accept the statement as made by Mr. Sakhare on behalf of the
NMMC that the petitioners who were contract appointees, would
not be disturbed insofar as their contractual appointments are
concerned;
2. The NMMC is permitted to proceed with the selection process
initiated under the Advertisement dated 27 March 2025 and
Corrigendum dated 29 April 2025 and to finalise the selection
process by making appropriate appointments. To this extent, the ad-
interim orders passed by this Court stand vacated;
3. We direct the Principal Secretary of the Urban Development
Department to place on record the final decision the State
Page 10 of 11
19 August 2026
909-IA-ST-21054-26.DOC
Government would take in regard to the regularization of the
petitioners/contract appointees as a one time measure, and more
particularly considering the settled principles of law as laid down by
the Supreme Court as referred to in the order dated 10 December,
2025. In taking such a decision, all the observations made by this
Court in the said order necessarily shall be considered in letter and
spirit. As substantial time has elapsed and such decision should have
been taken long back, without any further extension, the Principal
secretary shall take such appropriate decision within a period of four
weeks from today, in accordance with law.
13. The proceedings of the Writ Petition are returnable after four weeks from
today (HOB).
14. The Interim Applications stand disposed of in above terms. No costs.
(DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)
Page 11 of 11
19 August 2026
Checking your session…