Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

PAPINDER KAURversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court declined to entertain the writ petitions at this stage and directed the petitioners to approach the appropriate authority before seeking relief.

Summary

Petitioners Sakina Khan and Papinder Kaur filed writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution seeking mandamus directing the respondents to deposit salary arrears and pay Employees' Provident Fund contributions with interest. The Court observed that the petitioners had not first approached the concerned authorities for the relief claimed. Consequently, the Court declined to entertain the petitions at this stage and directed the petitioners to make a representation to the Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad within two weeks. The Deputy Director is required to decide the matter within eight weeks after giving a hearing to all parties. With these directions, the writ petitions were disposed, leaving all contentions of the parties open for future consideration.

Issues considered

  • Whether a writ petition under Articles 226/227 can be entertained when the petitioner has not first approached the concerned authority for the relief claimed
  • Whether mandamus is the appropriate remedy for payment of salary arrears and EPF contributions

Legislation cited

Subjects

  • Writ petition
  • Mandamus
  • Salary arrears
  • Employees' Provident Fund
  • Article 226
  • Article 227
  • Procedural requirement
  • High Court

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:9336-DB


                                               {1}                        39-wp-1829-2021

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                WRIT PETITION NO. 1829 OF 2021

             Sakina Khan                                      ….Petitioner

                    VERSUS

             The State Of Maharashtra And Others              ..Respondents

                                                 WITH
                                 WRIT PETITION NO. 1948 OF 2021
             Papinder Kaur                                    .....Petitioner

                  VERSUS

             The State Of Maharashtra And Others           .....Respondents
                                               …..
             Mr. Amol Kakade, Advocate for the Petitioners
             Mr. A.V. Lavte, AGP for State
             Mr. P.S. Dighe, Advocate for respondent No. 3

                                                .......

                                    CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                            VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV, JJ.

                                        DATE : 04th MARCH, 2026

             ORDER :

             1.     By these petitions filed under Article 226 and 227 of the

             Constitution of India, petitioners seek following reliefs:

                       “B)    That by issuing writ of mandamus or any other
                       appropriate writ, order or directions in like nature, the
                       respondents management i.e. respondent No. 3 and 4
                       may kindly be directed to deposit the amount in this
                                   {2}                          39-wp-1829-2021

          Hon’ble Court being arrears of salary due and payable
          to the petitioners consequent upon acceptance of
          revised     pay   structure    due    and   payable     to   the
          petitioner and upon failure of respondent no. 3 and 4
          to either pay directly to the petitioner or to deposit in
          this Hon’ble Court along with interest.

          C)     That by issuing writ of mandamus or any other
          appropriate writ, order or directions in like nature,
          respondents authorities may kindly be directed to pay
          the contributions of Employees Provident fund from
          the date of actual Contribution till 1995 with interest.”


2.    Since     the     petitioners      have     not     approached         the

respondents/authorities for seeking reliefs claimed in the petition, we

are not inclined to entertain the petition at this stage.



3.    Petitioners are at liberty to make representation to the Deputy

Director of Education, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad within two

weeks from today. On receipt of such representation, Deputy Director

of Education, Aurangabad shall take decision on the same within eight

weeks from the date of receipt of the representation, after giving

opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, management as well as

Education Officer.
                                    {3}                     39-wp-1829-2021

3.       With these directions, writ petitions are disposed of.


4.       All the contentions of respective parties are kept open.




(VAISHALI PATIL JADHAV, J.)                (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)



Bhagyawant Punde


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.