Disposed¶20

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Bombay HC17 Apr 2026WP/1714/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare v. State of Maharashtra; Writ Petition No. 1714 of 2026; Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench; order dated 17 April 2026; Certificate of Excellent Work 2006-07; withdrawal of excellent-work benefit; Government Resolution dated 24.08.2017 prospective effect; Writ Petition No. 1954 of 2018 order dated 25.01.2019; Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage Writ Petition No. 4995 of 2021 order dated 04.07.2022; Chief Executive Officer Zilla Parishad Jalna; refund prayer inadvertent, amount not recovered; disposal with direction to follow same recourse within two months.

What did the court decide?

Zilla Parishad directed to take the same recourse as directed in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. (supra); decision to be taken within two (2) months from the date of the order. ¶20

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare and Others vs the State of Maharashtra and Others — Bombay HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Zilla Parishad directed to take the same recourse as directed in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. (supra); decision to be taken within two (2) months from the date of the order.

¶20

Issue for consideration

Whether the petitioners are entitled to a similar order/recourse as directed in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. (supra) concerning the benefit of the Certificate of Excellent Work granted in 2006-07, in light of the Government Resolution dated 24.08.2017 and the order in Writ Petition No.1954 of 2018.

¶13

Court's answer

The writ petition is disposed of by directing the Zilla Parishad to take the same recourse as directed in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. (supra), and such decision shall be taken within a period of two (2) months, even though the clarification sought by the Zilla Parishad remained pending before the State Government.

¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court (Aurangabad Bench), Writ Petition No. 1714 of 2026 — Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Vibha Kankanwadi & Neeraj P. Dhote, JJ.; order dated 17.04.2026). Petitioners sought relief on the lines of the order dated 04.07.2022 (Principal Seat) in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra, W.P. No. 4995 of 2021, wherein it was observed that the Certificate of Excellent Work granted in 2006-07 could not be withdrawn retrospectively on the basis of a subsequent Government Resolution (GR dated 24.08.2017 having prospective effect only), with reference to W.P. No. 1954 of 2018 (connected matters) decided 25.01.2019. Noting the CEO, Zilla Parishad, Jalna's order dated 23.07.2025, communication dated 06.08.2025, and the clarification sought from the State Government on 08.09.2025 (still pending), the Court disposed of the petition directing the Zilla Parishad to take the same recourse as in Shivanand (supra) within two months. Counsel for the petitioners stated the refund prayer was inadvertent and that no amount had been recovered.

¶1

2026:BHC-AUG:16649-DB

¶2

913-wp-1714-2026.odt

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD

¶4

913 WRIT PETITION NO.1714 OF 2026

¶5

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare And Others VERSUS

¶6

The State Of Maharashtra And Others

¶7

Mr. Balaji Shinde h/f Mr. R. R. Kale, Advocate for the Petitioner. Mr. S. B. Pulkundwar, AGP for Respondents/State. Mr. Sanjaykumar B. Bhosale, Advocate for Respondent Nos.6 to 9.

¶8

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI &

NEERAJ P. DHOTE, JJ.

DATE : 17 APRIL 2026

ORDER :

. Issue notice to the respondents. Learned AGP waives service of notice on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 5, and learned Advocate Mr. Bhosale waives service of notice for Respondent Nos. 6 to 9.

¶13

Learned Advocate for the petitioners relies upon the order passed by this Court in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors., in Writ Petition No. 4995 of 2021 with companion matters, at the Principal Seat, on 04.07.2022, and submits that a similar order be passed in the present matter. In the said order, it has been observed that the petitioners therein were granted Certificate of Excellent Work in the year 2006-07 and the same cannot be withdrawn

¶14

[1]

¶15

913-wp-1714-2026.odt

¶16

retrospectively on the basis of a subsequent Government Resolution and by giving reference of Writ Petition No.1954 of 2018 with connected matters decided vide order dated 25.01.2019. It has been observed that the Government Resolution dated 24.08.2017 will have prospective effect and not retrospective and in that case benefit that was accorded to the petitioners of excellent work in the year 2006 and 2007, shall not be withdrawn. Learned Advocate for the petitioners makes a statement that inadvertently the petitioners were praying for refund. After tendering apology, he submits that amount has not been recovered from the petitioners.

¶17

In the present case, it appears that after the aforesaid order was passed, an order dated 23.07.2025 was issued by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Jalna, wherein it appears that effect was tried to be given, in respect of those persons who had filed the Writ Petition as well as those who had not filed the Writ Petition, in terms of the order passed in Writ Petition No.1954 of 2018. Thereafter, by communication dated 06.08.2025, a specific order was passed mentioning the names of the persons who had approached the Court by resorting to legal proceedings. Subsequently, by communication dated 08.09.2025, clarification was sought by the Zilla Parishad, Jalna, from the State Government.

¶18

[2]

¶19

913-wp-1714-2026.odt

¶20

In view of the statement made that the purpose of the petitioners would be served by passing a similar order, and though it appears that the clarification sought by the Zilla Parishad is pending before the State Government, we dispose of the Writ Petition by directing the Zilla Parishad to take the same recourse as directed in Shivanand s/o Shrimant Mage & Ors. (supra). Such decision shall be taken within a period of two

¶21

(2) months from today.

¶22

[ NEERAJ P. DHOTE ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE

¶23

scm

¶24

[3]

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Kalyan Santukrao Waghmare and Others v. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arun Brijalal Chaudhari vs the Union of India through Deputy Secretary and Others

Narayan Dagadu Fartade and Another vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Hemlata Gokul Gangurde vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Ors.

Mohammed Haroon Ameen Miyan Deshmukh and Others vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary and Others

Shilpa B.U. vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Secretary and Others

The Tahzeeb Education and Welfare Society through Its Chairman and Another vs the State of Maharashtra Thruogh Its Principal Secretary and Others