Partly allowed

Damini Pratik Chaudhari, Maiden Name Damini Pramod Khairkar v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna, Thr. Secretary and Others

Bombay HC13 Jan 2026WP/3633/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Nagpur Bench dismissed the writ petition but directed the Director of Marketing, Pune, to decide on the petitioner's appointment on compassionate ground submitted by the Market Committee within six weeks, and allowed the petitioner to file submissions against adverse resolution findings.

What did the court decide?

Directed Respondent No. 3 to decide on the appointment proposal within 6 weeks; petitioner at liberty to file submissions against adverse resolution findings.

Damini Pratik Chaudhari, Maiden Name Damini… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Bombay HC (2026)

¶1

2026:BHC-NAG:620-DB

¶2

919-wp-3633-2025.odt 1

¶3

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

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.3633 OF 2025

¶5

Damini Pratik Chaudhari

¶6

vs.

¶7

Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna, through its Secretary and others.

¶8

Ms Anjali A. Agrawal, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. Anurag Mankar, Advocate for respondent no. 1. Mrs. S. S. Jachak, Addl. Government Pleader for respondent nos. 2 and 3.

¶9

CORAM :- ANIL S. KILOR and RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE :- 13^th JANUARY, 2026

¶10

P C.

¶11

Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

¶12

The learned counsel appearing for the respondent no.1 makes a statement that the proposal for appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground has already been forwarded to the respondent no.3 on 12.02.2025. However, despite the lapse of about eleven months, there is no decision on the said proposal.

¶13

In the light of the above referred facts and prayer clause (d) made in the present petition, we are of the opinion that purpose would be served, if the petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent no.3-The Director of Marketing, Pune, to take a decision on the proposal submitted by the respondent no.1-Secretary, Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna.

¶14

Accordingly, we pass the following order:

¶15

(i) The writ petition is disposed of with directions to the respondent no.3-The Director of Marketing, Pune, to take a decision on the proposal submitted by the respondent no.1-Secretary, Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna in relation to grant of approval to the appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. Such decision shall be taken by the respondent no.3 within a period of six

¶16

919-wp-3633-2025.odt 2

¶17

weeks from the date of production of copy of this order.

¶18

(ii) The petitioner is at liberty to file written submissions, if any, against the adverse findings recorded in the Resolution dated 24.01.2025 of the Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna. Such submissions shall be filed by the petitioner within a period of two weeks from today.

¶19

(iii) The respondent no.3 shall take into consideration the written submissions, if any, filed by the petitioner, while taking decision on the proposal forwarded by the respondent no.1.

¶20

(iv) Decision taken on such proposal shall be communicated by the respondent no.3 to the petitioner within two weeks from the date of such decision.

¶21

With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of. No order as to costs.

¶22

( RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (ANIL S. KILOR, J.)

¶23

Andurkar.

¶24

Signed by: Jayant S. Andurkar Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 16/01/2026 18:26:25

Damini Pratik Chaudhari, Maiden Name Damini Pramod Khairkar v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna, Thr. Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Damini Pratik Chaudhari, Maiden Name Damini Pramod Khairkar v. Agricultural Produce Market Committee, Hingna, Thr. Secretary and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Vasudha Wd/O Praful Raipure and Others vs the Divisional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Others

Veena W/O Anil Kolhe and Others vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Chief Secretary, Urban Development Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Moil Janshakti Mazdoor Sangh, Balaghat Thr. President, Ramkripal L. Khurshel and Ors. vs Moil Limited, Nagpur, Thr. Chairman and Managing Director, Moil Ltd., Nagpur and Ors.

Devidas S/O. Shewaji Jadhao and Ors. vs Smt. Vinita Vaid Singhal, Secretary, Other Backward Bahujan Welfare Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Saraswati Shikshan Sanstha Subhashgram, Chamorshi, Thr. President, Itirani C. Saha and Anr. vs State of Maharashtra, Thr. Prin. Secretary, School Education and Sports Dept., Mumbai and Ors.

Union of India, Thr. General Manager, Central Railway, Cst, Mumbai and Others vs Shri R. H. Gharsile S/O Harishchandra Singh