Bombay High Court
SHAIKH MAZHAR SHAHAMIRversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
- Disposal
- DISPOSED OFF
Holding
The Court held that the recovery orders were unlawful and directed that the amounts be refunded and the petitioners be paid all consequential retiral benefits.
Summary
The petitioners, a group of individuals, challenged recovery orders passed by the State of Maharashtra that required them to pay certain amounts. They contended that the orders were illegal and that they were entitled to a refund of the amounts recovered along with all consequential retiral benefits. The High Court examined the matter in light of two earlier decisions of the same court (Writ Petition No. 1150 of 2026 and Writ Petition No. 6442 of 2026) which dealt with similar facts. Relying on the reasoning in those precedents, the Court found that the recovery orders were not justified. Consequently, the Court allowed all the writ petitions, directing that the amounts recovered be refunded within ninety days and that the petitioners receive their full retiral benefits.
Issues considered
- Whether the recovery orders issued against the petitioners by the State of Maharashtra were lawful.
- Whether the petitioners are entitled to a refund of the amounts recovered and to consequential retiral benefits.
Subjects
- writ petition
- refund
- retiral benefits
- State of Maharashtra
- High Court of Bombay
- recovery order
- precedent
Judgment
2026:BHC-AUG:37797-DB
1 4,5,99,102,104,224.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
4 WRIT PETITION NO. 9576 OF 2026
SHAIKH MAZHAR SHAHAMIR
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr. N.S. Tekale
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : Mr. Parth S. Salunke
…
5 WRIT PETITION NO. 9582 OF 2026
RANJANA BHAUSAHEB BANSODE
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
…
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
AGP for Respondent/State : Ms. Neha B. Kamble
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 to 4 : Mr. Parth S. Salunke
…
99 WRIT PETITION NO. 10089 OF 2025
JIJABAI RAOSAHEB THOMBRE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr.S.R. Wakale
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 : Mr. Vishal H. Rathod h/f. S.P. Urgunde
…
102 WRIT PETITION NO. 15160 OF 2025
ANSARI PARVEEN BANU MOHD. YOUSUF
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
…
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
2 4,5,99,102,104,224.doc
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr.S.K. Tambe
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 : Mr. Vishal H. Rathod h/f. S.P. Urgunde
…
104 WRIT PETITION NO. 1019 OF 2026
ATMARAM JANARDHAN KHEDKAR
VERSUS
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETORY AND OTHERS
...
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr.V.M. Kagne
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 : Mr. Parth S. Salunke
…
224 WRIT PETITION NO. 8264 OF 2026
DR BABASAHEB GANGARAM UNAWANE
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS
…
Advocate for the Petitioner : Ms. Ansari Asfia Nuzhat
AGP for Respondent/State : Mr.V.M. Kagne
Advocate for Respondent Nos.2 and 3 : Mr. Parth S. Salunke
…
CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI AND
ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : 18.08.2026
PER COURT :
. The case of the Petitioners is squarely covered by the decision of
the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1150 of 2026
and by this Bench in Writ Petition No. 6442 of 2026.
2. For the reasons stated in the said orders, the Writ Petitions are
allowed. The amount recovered from the Petitioners pursuant to the
impugned orders is directed to be refunded to them within 90 days and
3 4,5,99,102,104,224.doc
the Petitioners shall be paid all the consequential retiral benefits
thereof.
( ABASAHEB D. SHINDE, J. ) ( NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J. )
vsj..
Checking your session…