Bombay High Court

AYUB AALAM MULLAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. SECRETARY OF HIGHER EDUCATION DEPT. AND ORS.

Holding

Respondent No.2 must decide the pension proposal dated 15 May 2025 within eight weeks of the order.

Summary

The petitioner, Ayub Aalam Mulla, filed a writ petition alleging that a pension proposal dated 15 May 2025, forwarded by Respondent No.3 to Respondent No.2, remained undecided. The petition sought a directive compelling Respondent No.2 to act on the proposal. The High Court, noting the limited nature of the grievance, ordered Respondent No.2 to decide the proposal expeditiously, specifying a deadline of eight weeks from the date of the order. The Court also directed that any supporting documents required be obtained from the petitioner’s management within the same timeframe. Consequently, the petition was disposed of after the directive was issued.

Issues considered

What is the appropriate judicial remedy when a government department fails to decide a pending pension proposal?

Subjects

writ petition
pension
administrative delay
High Court of Bombay
expeditious decision
civil appellate jurisdiction

Judgment

                                                                   95-WP-342-2026.doc




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                         CIRCUIT BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                       WRIT PETITION NO. 342 OF 2026

Ayub Aalam Mulla                                       ...Petitioner
           Versus
The State of Maharashtra, through Secretary of         ...Respondents
Higher Education Department and Others

                                  ——————
Mr. C. G. Gavnekar appears for the Petitioner through VC, a/w Mr. Shashant
Mangle, Ashitosh Jambilkar and Miss Prajakta Kamble – Advocate for the
Petitioner
Mr. R. S. Pawar - AGP for the State
                                  ——————

                                    Coram :    Sharmila U. Deshmukh &
                                               Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.
                                    Date     : October 08, 2026.
P. C. :


1.         The limited grievance in the Petition is that the proposal dated

15.05.2025, forwarded by Respondent No. 3 to Respondent No. 2 in

respect of pension, has not been decided by Respondent No. 2 till date.


2.         Considering the limited grievance, the Petition is disposed of by

directing Respondent No. 2 to decide the proposal dated 15.05.2025

expeditiously and, in any event, within a period of eight (8) weeks from

today.



SG Punde                            1 of 2
                                                             95-WP-342-2026.doc



3.         If any supporting documents are required by Respondent No. 2,

the same be called for and submitted by the Management of the

Petitioner. However, the entire exercise shall be completed within a

period of eight (8) weeks from today.




 [Neeraj P. Dhote, J.]                      [Sharmila U. Deshmukh, J.]




SG Punde                           2 of 2

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…