Disposed¶14

Surekha Maruti Nakate v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Public Health Dept and Ors.

Bombay HC2 Dec 2025WP/11429/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Pension/service grievance matter: widow-petitioner contends she, not Respondent No.5, is entitled to deceased husband's pensionary benefits; no merits determination — writ petition disposed of directing petitioner to the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, contentions kept open, with a request to the MAT to sympathetically consider any delay. Relevant to: availability of MAT remedy under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for service/pension disputes; disposal of writ petitions in favour of tribunal jurisdiction; Bombay High Court Kolhapur Circuit Bench, 2025.

What did the court decide?

Liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, with all contentions of the Petitioner kept open. ¶14

Surekha Maruti Nakate Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr Public Health Dept and Ors. — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal, with all contentions of the Petitioner kept open.

¶14

Issue for consideration

Whether the Petitioner, and not Respondent No.5, is entitled to the pensionary benefits of her deceased husband, the amount of pension having been submitted by counsel to have been wrongly disbursed in favour of Respondent No.5. +1 more

¶12

Ratio / Principle

On perusal of the petition, the appropriate course for the Petitioner is to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in terms of the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

¶13

Key takeaways

Keeping all contentions of the Petitioner open, the petition is disposed of with liberty to the Petitioner to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal.ratio¶14
As the Petitioner was bona fide pursuing this petition, the Court requests the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal to sympathetically consider the question of delay, if it arises.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

WRIT PETITION NO. 11429 OF 2025 — High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Circuit Bench at Kolhapur (Civil Appellate Jurisdiction) — M. S. Karnik & Ajit B. Kadethankar, JJ. — Decided December 2, 2025 — Surekha Maruti Nakate v. The State of Maharashtra and Others. Counsel submitted that the amount of pension was wrongly disbursed in favour of Respondent No.5 and that the Petitioner is entitled to the pensionary benefits of her deceased husband. On perusal of the petition, the Court held that the appropriate course for the Petitioner is to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal in terms of the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Keeping all contentions of the Petitioner open, the petition was disposed of with liberty to approach the Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal; and, as the Petitioner was bona fide pursuing the petition, the Court requested the MAT to sympathetically consider the question of delay, if it arises. No merits decision on the pension entitlement was made by this Court.

Surekha Maruti Nakate v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Public Health Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Surekha Maruti Nakate v. the State of Maharashtra Thr Public Health Dept and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Gundhar Akiwate Vs the State of Maharashtra through the Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Balaso Shivgonda Patil Vs State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary, Environment and Forest Dept. and Ors.

Vidhyadhar Sitram Mestry and Ors. Vs State of Maharashtra through Gp. and Ors.

Nilesh Rajendra Potdar Vs the State of Maharashtra Thr. Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. and Ors.

Baba Bapu Masal Vs the State of Maharashtra (Thr the Secretary, School Education Dept. ) and Ors.

Tukaram Jivaba Patil Decd Thru Lhrs Vs Additional Collector, Kolhapur and Anr.