Sanjay so Ramath Ingale vs Shri Ranjit Singh Deol — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Sanjay so Ramath Ingale vs Shri Ranjit Singh Deol — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Minutes of the order dated 17.10.2025 corrected by substituting 'dismissed' for 'disposed of' in paragraph 4, with corrected copy to be uploaded on the website; review applications filed by the State dismissed on the ground of delay; undertaking of the Education Officer (Secondary) to comply within four weeks recorded and contempt petitions disposed of; non-compliance within eight weeks to be treated as aggravated contempt.

Issue for consideration

Whether the minutes of the order dated 17.10.2025 should be corrected so that paragraph 4 records that the civil applications were 'dismissed' rather than 'disposed of'. +2 more

Court's answer

In paragraph 4 of the order dated 17.10.2025, the words 'disposed of' are substituted with 'dismissed', the civil applications having been dismissed on merits; correction to be carried out and corrected copy uploaded on the website.

Ratio / Principle

The review applications filed by the State are dismissed on the ground of delay.

Key takeaways

The statement of the Education Officer (Secondary), made on instructions of the learned AGP, that the order will be complied with within four weeks is recorded as an undertaking to the Court, and the contempt petitions are disposed of.ratio¶¶39
If the order is not complied with within eight weeks from the date of this order, the non-compliance shall be treated as an aggravated form of contempt.ratio¶¶40

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Bench at Aurangabad), per Nitin B. Suryawanshi & Vaishali Patil–Jadhav, JJ. (Per Court), 09.12.2025: On oral motion of the learned AGP for speaking to the minutes, the Court corrected its order dated 17.10.2025 by substituting 'dismissed' for 'disposed of' in paragraph 4, the civil applications having been dismissed on merits, and directed upload of the corrected copy on the website. The review applications filed by the State were dismissed on the ground of delay. On instructions of the learned AGP, the Education Officer (Secondary) stated that the order would be complied with within four weeks; the Court recorded the statement as an undertaking, disposed of the contempt petitions, and clarified that failure to comply within eight weeks would be treated as an aggravated form of contempt.

905 cp 253 2025 and speaking 2252 2024 CAs++

2025:BHC-AUG:36021-DB

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

905 CONT. PETITION NO. 253 OF 2025

SANJAY S/O RAMATH INGALE VERSUS

SHRI RANJIT SINGH DEOL

Advocate for petitioner : Adv. Ketan D. Pote h/f. Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar AGP for State : Mr. N.D. Batule

AND

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2252 OF 2024 IN RAST/2730/2024

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS

VERSUS

ANAND HARIDAS NAVGIRE AND ANR.

AGP for Applicants : Mr. V.K. Kotecha Advocate for petitioner : Mr. A.D. Pawar

WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2243 OF 2024 IN RAST/1281/2024

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND

ANOTHER VERSUS

SANJAY RAMNATH INGLE AND ANOTHER

AGP for applicants/State : Mr. V.K. Kotecha

Advocate for respondent No.1 : Mr. Ketan D. Pote h/f Mr. Arvind G. Ambetkar

WITH

CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 2253 OF 2024 IN RAST/1284/2024

1/3

komal kamble

905 cp 253 2025 and speaking 2252 2024 CAs++

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH SECRETARY AND OTHERS VERSUS

PUNJAHARI BABURAO DIGHE AND OTHERS

AGP for applicants/State : Mr. V.K. Kotecha Advocate for Respondent nos.8, 9, 10 to 14 : Mr. T.P. Shirsath Advocate for respondent nos.6 to 10 in WP : Mr. S.S. Wagh

CORAM : NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI & VAISHALI PATIL – JADHAV, JJ.

DATE : 09.12.2025

P E R C O U R T :

Oral motion is made by learned AGP for speaking to the minutes of the order dated 17.10.2025. He points out that though the civil applications were dismissed on merits, in paragraph 4 of the said order it is treated that civil applications are “ disposed of ”. He is right in pointing out the same.

In paragraph 4, the words “ disposed of ” be substituted with “ dismissed ”.

Correction be carried out and corrected copy be uploaded on the website accordingly.

The review applications filed by the State are dismissed on the ground of delay.

2/3

komal kamble

905 cp 253 2025 and speaking 2252 2024 CAs++

Learned AGP, on instructions from the Education Officer

(Secondary), states that order will be complied with within four weeks from today. We record the said statement as an undertaking to this Court and dispose of the contempt petitions.

It is made clear that if the order is not complied with within eight weeks from today, the same shall be treated as aggravated form of contempt.

[VAISHALI PATIL – JADHAV, J.]

[NITIN B. SURYAWANSHI, J.]

3/3

komal kamble