Bombay High Court

SMT SHARADA GOTU PARDESHI AND ANOTHERversusTHE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AND OTHERS

Disposal: DISPOSED OFF

Holding

The Court held that the Committee must decide the appeal within one month of receipt of the order, failing which a strict view will be taken.

Summary

The petitioners filed an appeal on 13 January 2025 which remained pending before Respondent No.2, the Committee, beyond the period prescribed by the Government Resolution dated 27 March 2024. That resolution mandates that an appeal must be decided within six months after hearing the parties, taking into account relevant government orders and judicial decisions. The petitioners sought a writ directing the Committee to decide the appeal promptly. The Court examined the statutory requirement in Clause 15 of the resolution and held that the Committee’s inaction violated the mandated time‑frame. Consequently, the Court disposed of the writ petition by ordering the Committee to decide the appeal, after hearing the parties, within one month of receiving the order, warning of a strict view if the deadline is missed.

Issues considered

Whether the Committee’s failure to decide the appeal within six months violates the Government Resolution dated 27‑03‑2024.
Whether the High Court can issue a directive imposing a one‑month deadline for the Committee to decide the appeal.

Legislation cited

Government Resolution dated 27.03.2024 — s. Clause 15

Subjects

writ petition
administrative delay
government resolution
time‑bound decision
high court direction

Judgment

2026:BHC-AUG:40281-DB


                                              {1}                     2-wp-9285-2026

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE OF BOMBAY
                                   BENCH AT AURANGABAD

                               2 WRIT PETITION NO. 9285 OF 2026

                             Smt. Sharada Gotu Pardeshi And Another
                                              VERSUS
                               The State Of Maharashtra And Others
                                                  ...
              Mr. V.S. Panpatte, Advocate for the Petitioners
              Mr. M.K. Goyanka, AGP for State
              Mr. Umesh Mote, Advocate for Respondent No. 2
                                                .......

                                    CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
                                             ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.


                                       DATE : 02nd SEPTEMBER, 2026
              PER COURT :

              1.   The appeal filed by the petitioners on 13.01.2025 is still not

              decided by the respondent No.2 – Committee. The said action of the

              Committee is contrary to the Government Resolution dated 27.03.2024

              which stipulates that after the appeal is filed the same has to be

              decided after hearing the parties and after taking into consideration

              the concerned Government Resolutions, Circulars, notifications, orders

              and the decisions of this Court which are pertaining to the subject of

              the appeal within six (6) months.


              2.   Writ petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to

              decide the appeal, after hearing the parties, within one (1) month from

              the date of receipt of copy of this order in terms of Clause 15 of the
                                 {2}                     2-wp-9285-2026

said Government Resolution. If the time stipulation in this order is not

followed, strict view in the matter will be taken.



(ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J.)               (NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.)




Bhagyawant Punde

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…