Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

DINKAR SALUJI KALE AND OTHERSversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

Disposal
DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court directed the concerned authorities to decide the pending representations within twelve weeks, treating the writ petition as a representation if the original documents are not traceable.

Summary

The petitioners, Dinkar Saluji Kale and others, filed a writ petition seeking a court direction for the State of Maharashtra to decide two representations dated 2 August 2010 and 29 January 2018, which sought payment of salary differences as per the 5th Pay Commission retroactive to 1 January 1996. The petitioners argued that the representations addressed to senior officials in the School Education Department remained undecided. The Court noted that the prayer was limited to a directive for the authorities to consider and decide the pending representations on their merits. It ordered the concerned authorities to decide the matters within twelve weeks, and if the representations could not be located, to treat the writ petition itself as a representation. The Court further directed the authority to make a decision in accordance with law and dismissed the writ petition as disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether a High Court can issue a mandatory direction to an administrative authority to decide pending representations concerning salary adjustments under the 5th Pay Commission
  • Whether the petitioners are entitled to salary difference benefits retroactively from 1 January 1996

Subjects

  • writ petition
  • salary difference
  • 5th Pay Commission
  • administrative direction
  • pending representations
  • public service

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:37154-DB

                                                                               1 WP NO. 5343 OF 2018


                             IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                        BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                                      WRIT PETITION NO. 5343 OF 2018

                                           Dinkar Saluji Kale And Others
                                                     VERSUS
                                      The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                                                         …
                       •   Mr. R. D. Biradar, Advocate for the Petitioners
                       •   Mr. P. S. Patil, AGP for Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 - State
                                                         …

                                                     CORAM : KISHORE C. SANT &
                                                             JITENDRA JAIN, JJ.

                                                     DATE      : 17th AUGUST, 2026
                PER COURT :

                1.              The petitioners are praying for a direction to the

                respondent        authorities   to   decide   the   representations       dated

                02.08.2010 and 29.01.2018 made by them and to pay the difference

                of salary as per the 5th Pay Commission with effect from 01.01.1996.

                2.            Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the

                aforesaid representations are addressed to the Principal Secretary,

                School Education Department, the Commissioner of Education, and

                the Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad/Latur Division, and

                the same are yet to be decided.

                3.            Considering the limited prayer made in the present petition,

                we deem it appropriate to direct the concerned authorities to

                consider and decide the representations dated 02.08.2010 and


                Jhs/                                                                           1/2
                                                          1 WP NO. 5343 OF 2018


29.01.2018 in accordance with law and on their own merits, as

expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of twelve

(12) weeks from today. In the event the said representations are not

traceable, the present writ petition shall be treated as a

representation for the said purpose.

4.       The concerned authority shall take an appropriate decision

in accordance with law after considering the claim of the petitioners.

5.       Writ Petition stands disposed of.




 [JITENDRA JAIN, J.]                          [KISHORE C. SANT, J.]




Jhs/                                                                      2/2


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.