Bombay High Court
AARTI NAMDEO GAWALIversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The court extended the protection period by three weeks and disposed of the petition.
Summary
The petitioner, Aarti Namdeo Gawali, filed a writ petition seeking relief because a prior order dated 20 July 2026 directing a Committee to decide her claim within one month had not yet resulted in a judgment. The petitioner feared that the limited protection granted by the court would lapse before the Committee’s decision, potentially exposing her to adverse action. The respondents, represented by the Attorney General and counsel, informed the court that the hearing before the Committee was complete and only the judgment remained pending, and they requested an extension of time. The bench considered the petitioner's apprehensions and the Committee’s status, and consequently extended the protection period by three weeks from the date of the order. The petition was thereafter disposed, with a clear directive that no adverse action be taken against the petitioner during the extended period or until the claim is decided, whichever occurs first.
Issues considered
- Whether the court may extend the time granted to the Committee to pronounce its judgment beyond the initially ordered one-month period
- Whether the protection from adverse action granted to the petitioner should continue during the extended period
Subjects
- writ petition
- extension of time
- protective order
- adverse action
- committee judgment
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37886-DB
919-WP.10547.2026.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
919 WRIT PETITION NO. 10547 OF 2026
Aarti Namdeo Gawali
VERSUS
The State of Maharashtra And Others
...
Mr. Deepak D. Choudhari, Advocate for the Petitioner.
Mr. S. R. Yadav, AGP for Respondent Nos.1 & 2.
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad, Advocate for Respondent No.3.
...
CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.
DATE : 19th AUGUST, 2026
PER COURT :
1. Heard learned advocate for the petitioner.
2. Issue notice to the respondents.
3. The learned AGP waives notice for respondent nos.1 & 2 and
Mr. Gaikwad, learned advocate waives notice for respondent no.3.
4. The only grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of order
dated 20.07.2026 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No.8099 of
2026, still the claim of the petitioner is not decided. This Court by
order dated 20.07.2026 had requested the Committee to pronounce
its judgment within a period of one month from the date of order.
Though the period of one month has not expired, but it would expire
Sayyed 1/2
919-WP.10547.2026.doc
tomorrow. It is on the apprehension that the respondents may take
any adverse action as the protection granted by this Court was only
for a period of one month, and therefore the petitioner has
approached this Court.
5. The learned AGP, on instructions from the officer of the
Committee who is personally present in the Court informs that
hearing is already completed and only judgment is to be pronounced.
He, therefore, seeks extension of time.
6. Considering above, this petition can be disposed of with
following order :-
Time granted by this Court vide order dated
20.07.2026 stands extended by a further period of
three weeks from today. With this, the petition stands
disposed of.
7. It is made clear that no adverse action be taken against
petitioner for a period of three weeks or till the claim is decided
whichever is earlier.
(JITENDRA JAIN, J.) (KISHORE C. SANT, J.)
Sayyed 2/2
Checking your session…