Dismissed¶18

Smt. Kumud Wd/O Siddharth Meshram v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, General Administration Dept. Ministry of Education and Others

Bombay HC13 Aug 2025MCA/156/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench; Miscellaneous Civil Application No.156/2025 in Writ Petition No.3711/2021 (D); Smt. Kumud Wd/o Siddartha Meshram v. State of Maharashtra and others; review of order dated 6.7.2023; Government Resolution dated 21.9.2017; compassionate appointment in a private aided school; ground not pressed and argued; review not permissible; review application rejected; no costs; Anil S. Kilor and Mrs. Vrushali V. Joshi, JJ.; decided 13.8.2025.

What did the court decide?

A review on a ground which was not pressed and argued is not permissible. ¶18

Smt. Kumud Wd/O Siddharth Meshram vs State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, General Administration Dept. Ministry of Education and Others — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

¶2

mca156.2025.odt

¶3

2025:BHC-NAG:7999-DB

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR

¶5

MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL APPLICATION NO.156/2025 IN

¶6

WRIT PETITION NO.3711/2021 (D)

¶7

(Smt. Kumud Wd/o Siddartha Meshram Vs. State of Maharashtra and others)

¶8

- - - - Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders

¶9

¶10

Mr. P.N. Shende, Advocate for petitioner. Ms. M.H. Deshmukh, A.G.P. for respondent Nos.1 to 3 and 5. Mr. N.S. Khubalkar, Advocate for respondent Nos.4 and 5. Mr. Prashant Gode, Advocate for respondent Nos.6 and 7.

¶11

Mr. Subhash Paliwal, Advocate for respondent Nos.8 and 9.

¶12

CORAM: ANIL S. KILOR & MRS.VRUSHALI V. JOSHI, JJ. DATED: 13.8.2025.

¶13

Heard.

¶14

The learned Advocate for the applicant/petitioner sought review of the order dated 6.7.2023 on the ground that this Court has wrongly relied upon the Government Resolution dated 21.9.2017 which is not applicable to the petitioner as she is seeking compassionate appointment in a private aided school whereas the above Government Resolution is applicable to the government employees.

¶15

On a specific query made to the learned Advocate for the applicant, whether this argument was made before the Court or pointed out while dictating the judgment in open Court, the learned Advocate submits that he was not the lawyer at that time and some other lawyer appeared and argued.

¶16

Thus, on the point which was never argued and pressed in service while arguing the matter, the review came to be filed.

¶17

2 mca156.2025.odt

¶18

In that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the review on the ground which was not pressed and argued is not permissible. Accordingly, review application is rejected. No costs.

¶19

(MRS.VRUSHALI V.JOSHI, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)

¶20

Tambaskar.

¶21

Signed by: MR. N.V. TAMBASKAR Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 14/08/2025 17:03:07

Smt. Kumud Wd/O Siddharth Meshram v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, General Administration Dept. Ministry of Education and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt. Kumud Wd/O Siddharth Meshram v. State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary, General Administration Dept. Ministry of Education and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Rahul S/O Premnath Kawre Vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Revenue and Forest Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

The State of Maharashtra, through Its Secretary, General Administration Department, Mumbai and 3 Ot Vs Amol S/O Balkirshna Patil and 5 Others

Shrikant Fulchand Pawade and Others Vs State of Maha., Dept. of Industries, Energy, Labour and Mining, Thr. Prin. Secy., Mumbai and Ors.

Meena W/O Shivdas Khandait and Others vs State of Maharashtra through the Collector, Bhandara and Others

Paramhans Ramsumarbaba Co-Op. Housing So., Ngapur Thr. Secy., Akshay a. Tidke Vs State of Maha., Thr. Secy., Urban Development, Mumbai and Ors.

Namrata D/O Arvind Kasar Vs the Collector, Wardha and Others