Bombay High Court

PATHAN YUSUF KHAN IBRAHIM KHANversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR GOVT PLEADER AND ORS

Decided: 8 September 2026
Disposal: Disposed Off

Holding

The Court quashed the impugned orders, restored the original appointment approval, and directed payment of pension and related benefits to the petitioners.

Summary

The petitioners, Balasaheb Vinayakrao Kane and Pathan Yusuf Khan Ibrahim Khan, challenged a order dated 30 March 2026 issued by the Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, which cancelled the approval of their appointments originally granted on 27 January 1992 and consequently denied them pension benefits. They sought a writ of mandamus to restore the approval and secure pensionary benefits. The Court held that the Deputy Director's order was arbitrary and illegal, especially after a lapse of 34 years, and accepted the withdrawal of the order by the authority as indicated by the learned AGPs. Consequently, the Court quashed the impugned orders, including the earlier order dated 22 April 2022, and directed the respondents to give effect to the original appointment approval and to pay the pension and related benefits. The writ petitions were disposed of without any costs.

Issues considered

Whether the Deputy Director of Education had the jurisdiction to cancel the appointment approval after 34 years.
Whether the cancellation of the appointment approval was legal and valid.
Whether the petitioners are entitled to pension and other retirement benefits despite the cancellation.
Whether the impugned orders can be quashed under the writ jurisdiction of the High Court.

Legislation cited

Constitution of India — s. Article 226, Article 227

Subjects

appointment cancellation
pension
writ of mandamus
administrative law
quashing order
public servant
service benefits

Judgment

Digitally
signed by
PRASHANT
PRASHANT VILAS
VILAS
RANE
RANE
Date: 901-WP 7641-26.DOC
2026.09.16
19:35:51
+0530

Prajakta Vartak
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 7641 OF 2026
Balasaheb Vinayakrao Kane ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
AND
WRIT PETITION NO. 11291 OF 2026
(Not on board. Taken on board.)

Pathan Yusuf Khan Ibrahim Khan ...Petitioner
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Ors. ...Respondents
_________
Ms. Pranita Hingmire for Petitioner in WP No. 7641/26.
Mr. Rahul Kadam for Petitioner in WP No. 11291/26.
Mr. Aditya Deolekar, AGP for State in WP No. 7641/26.
Mrs. Nisha Mehra, AGP for State in WP No. 11291/26.
Mr. Sarang Aradhye with Ms. Gauri Velankar and Ms. Sajiri Shah for Respondent
Nos.6 & 7/ Management in both matters.
_________

CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI &
Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.
DATE: 08 SEPTEMBER 2026.

P.C.

1. These are two petitions impugning a common order dated 30 March 2026

passed by Dr. Ganpat More, Deputy Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune.

The prayers made in both the petitions are required to be noted which read thus:-

“ Prayers in Writ Petition No. 7641 of 2026
a) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or
any other writ, order or direction in the nature quashed and set aside the
order dated 22/04/2022 (Exhibit-F) and 06/04/2026(Exhibit-I) passed by
Respondent No. 3.

b) This Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a Writ of Mandamus or
any other writ, order or direction in the nature direct the Respondent No. 2
to 5 to immediately start the pension to the Petitioner with interest and
further disburse the pension and other related benefits with interest within

Page 1 of 3
08 September 2026
901-WP 7641-26.DOC

stipulated time.

c) Pending hearing and final disposal of this writ petition the
Respondent No. 2 to 5 further be directed to immediately start the pension
to the Petitioner regularly and further disburse the pension and other related
benefits within stipulated time.

c) Ad-interim and interim reliefs be granted in terms of prayer clause
(c) of the above;

d) Cost of the petition be provided for;

e) for such other and further reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit
and proper.”

Prayers in Writ Petition No. 11291 of 2026
“[A] That this Hon'ble Court under its Writ jurisdiction under Article
226 and 227 of the Constitution of India 1950, be please to call for the
record and proceedings of the impugned orders Dt. 22.04.2022 &
30.03.2026 passed by the Respondent No. 2, Deputy Director of
Education, Pune Region & the said orders being illegal and bad in law Both
the orders may be quashed and set aside, and the so-called alleged complaint
of the original complainant may be dismissed.
B] That this Hon'ble Court under its Civil Appellate Writ jurisdiction
under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950, be please to
direct the Respondents since the present Petitioner's appointment and
approval are valid. He is entitled to pensionary benefits, and thus the
Respondents may be directed to provide the Petitioner all retirement
benefits, including pension and gratuity to which he is entitled forwarding
his proposal for Pension.

[C] Interim / Ad- interim relief in terms of prayer Clause [A] and [B]
may be awarded in favour of the Petitioner.

[D] That the costs of this Writ petition be awarded in favour of
Petitioner against Respondent, by this Hon'ble Court.

[E] For such other orders as justice and convenience may demand from
time to time be passed in favour of the Petitioner by this Hon'ble Court.”

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that, by the impugned order, the

approval granted to their appointments by a common order dated 27 January

1992 has been cancelled, after a lapse of 34 years, and that too on a wholly

unsustainable ground. We heard the petitions yesterday, i.e. on 07 September

2026, when we passed the following order in Writ Petition No. 7641 of 2026:-

Page 2 of 3
08 September 2026
901-WP 7641-26.DOC

“1. The facts of the case of this petition are gross, the Deputy Director
of Education Dr. Ganpat More has passed a totally high handed, arbitrary
and illegal order, we intend to pass appropriate orders, including to consider
whether the said incumbent is fit to discharge duties as a public servant.
2. However, at the request of Mr. Deolekar, learned AGP, stand over to
8th September 2026.”

3. Today, Mr. Deolekar, learned AGP, as also Ms. Mehra, learned AGP, on

instructions, state that the impugned order dated 30 March 2026, along with the

communication dated 06 April 2026, are being withdrawn by the Deputy

Director of Education, Pune Region, Pune. It is further stated that, as a

consequence thereof, the approval granted to the appointment of the petitioners

by an order dated 27 January 1992 would stand restored. As a consequence

thereto, the order dated 22 April 2022, as referred to in the operative portion of

the impugned order dated 30 March 2026, would also not survive. Accordingly,

the order dated 22 April 2022 is also quashed and set aside. Ordered accordingly.

4. The respondents are directed to forthwith give effect to the approval in

respect of all matters relating to the payment of pension and any other relevant

issues incidental thereto.

5. In this view of the matter, accepting the statement made by the learned

AGPs on instructions that the impugned orders stand withdrawn, further

adjudication of the present writ petitions is not called for.

6. The writ petitions stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.

(Dr. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.)

Page 3 of 3
08 September 2026

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…