Bombay High Court
PANDURANG SHRIPATI KADAMversusSHETAKARI SHIKSHAN PRASARAK MANDAL THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT AND ORS
- Disposal
- Dismissed
Holding
Both writ petitions are dismissed for non‑prosecution.
Summary
The petitioners filed two writ petitions seeking the release of legal dues, including leave encashment, dearness allowance, pay slips, TDS certificates, and salary certificates, from the respondents, a college and its officials. The respondents contended that they had already complied with the petitioners' demands and argued that the petitions lacked merit. On 28 July 2026 the petitioner's counsel requested time to file a rejoinder, but the petitioner failed to appear thereafter, including on the scheduled hearing of 17 August 2026. The court noted the petitioner's apparent loss of interest in pursuing the matter. Consequently, both writ petitions were dismissed for non‑prosecution.
Issues considered
- What relief, if any, is available to the petitioners for the claimed legal dues under a writ petition?
- Whether the respondents have complied with the petitioners' demands, negating the need for judicial intervention?
- Whether the petitioner's failure to appear and prosecute the writ petitions warrants dismissal.
Subjects
- writ petition
- non‑prosecution
- dismissal
- legal dues
- leave encashment
- salary certificate
Judgment
4-WP-8074-16.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 8074 OF 2016
WITH
WRIT PETITION NO. 10784 OF 2015
Pandurang Shripati Kadam … Petitioner
V/s.
Sspms College Of Engneering and Ors. … Respondents
___________
None for the petitioner.
Mr. N.C. Walimbe, AGP a/w Santosh A. Jadhav, B Panel Counsel, for
the respondent no.4.
Adv. A. Karandikar (through V.C.) for the respondent nos. 1 and 2.
Adv. Vikram Walawalkar (through V.C.) a/w R. Rane, for the
respondent no.3. in WP No. 10784/2015
___________
CORAM : RAJESH S. PATIL,
& ABHAY J. MANTRI, JJ.
DATE : 24 AUGUST 2026
P. C. :
1. The petitioners are seeking a release of their legal dues from
respondent nos.1 and 2.
2. Mr. Karandikar, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.1
and 2 submits that in paragraph no.6 of the memo of the writ petition
no. 8074 of 2016, the petitioner has sought payment under the head
leave encashment, D.A, pay slips for the month of June 2006 to
December 2008, TDS certificate, salary certificate.
Rushi 1 of 2
4-WP-8074-16.doc
3. Mr. Karandikar, learned counsel appearing for respondent nos.1
and 2 submits that, respondent nos.1 and 2 have already complied
with the demands made in paragraph no.6. He submits that there is no
merit in the present writ petition.
4. On 28 July 2026, Advocate for the petitioner was present in the
Court, who sought time to file rejoinder. Thereafter, on 17 August
2026, none appeared for the petitioner; hence, the matter was
adjourned to today under the caption “For Dismissal”.
5. Today again nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner. It seems
that the petitioner has lost interest to pursue the matter any further.
Both the Writ Petition stand dismissed for non-prosecution.
[ABHAY J. MANTRI, J.] [RAJESH S. PATIL, J.]
Rushi 2 of 2
Checking your session…