Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Bombay High Court

JOSEPH LANCERIO JESUS MIRANDAversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROU. THE SEC. SCHOOL EDUCATION DEPT AND ORS

Decided
Disposal
Disposed Off

Holding

The Court ordered that the pension nomination proposal be forwarded within one week and decided within four weeks, thereby disposing of the petition.

Summary

Joseph Lancerio Jesus Miranda filed a writ petition challenging the handling of a pension nomination in favour of his son by the State of Maharashtra. The respondents, including the School Education Department and a third respondent, argued that the nomination should be processed and forwarded to the other respondents. The Court examined the procedural aspects of forwarding the proposal and the need for a timely decision. It ordered that the nomination proposal be forwarded within one week of the order and that the matter be decided within four weeks of receipt. No costs were awarded and the petition was disposed.

Issues considered

  • Whether the pension nomination in favour of the son should be forwarded to the concerned authorities
  • Whether the Court should prescribe a timeline for forwarding and deciding the proposal

Subjects

  • pension
  • nomination
  • writ petition
  • administrative law
  • public service

Judgment

                                                                                          14_WP_582_2026.DOC



                                   IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                           CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                                               WRIT PETITION NO.582 OF 2026

                       Joseph Lancerio Jesus Miranda                                    ...Petitioner
                              Versus
                       The State Of Maharashtra
                       throu. the Sec. School Education Dept. & Ors.                    ...Respondents
                                                           _______

                       Mr. Laxman S. Deshmukh, for Petitioner.
                       Ms. M.P. Thakur, AGP for Respondent – State.
                       Mr. A.G. Kothari, for Respondent No.3.
                                                          _______

                                                     CORAM:        G. S. KULKARNI &
                                                                   DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ.

                                                     DATE:         31st AUGUST 2026

                       P.C.

                       1.       The only substantive prayer made in this petition is prayer clause (A).

                       2.       Mr. Kothari, representing Respondent No.3 states that the nomination for

                       the purpose of pension has been made in favour of the son and that Respondent

                       No.3 shall accordingly forward the proposal to Respondent Nos.1 and 2.

                       Accordingly, let the proposal be forwarded within a period of one week from today.

                       3.       All contentions of the parties on the proposal are expressly kept open.

                       4.       The proposal be decided in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible

                       and in any event, within a period of four weeks of receipt of this order.

                       5.       Disposed of in the aforesaid terms. No costs.




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

PRASAD
RAJENDRASING
RAJPUT

 Digitally signed by
 PRASAD
 RAJENDRASING
                                                           Page 1 of 1
 RAJPUT                Prasad
 Date: 2026.09.01
 10:32:18 +0530


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.