12-WP-1969-2025 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO. 1969 OF 2025 (Namrata wd/o Vivek Dhoke Vs. The Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Bhandara & Ors.) __________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders. Mr. B.M. Kharkate, Counsel for the petitioner. Mr. N.R. Patil, A.G.P. for respondent nos. 1 to 3/State. Mr. V.K. Paliwal, Counsel for respondent no.4. ..... CORAM : ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. SEPTEMBER 3, 2026 On 5/8/2026, following order was passed : “1. In response to order dated 07.07.2026 read with order dated 21.07.2026, the counsel for Respondent No. 4 has filed a pursis, stating therein that the resignation tendered by the petitioner was accepted in the meeting of the Executive Committee of the trust held on 22.01.2022. The proposal for further action was sent to Respondent No. 1 on 23.03.2022. Respondent No. 4 has annexed with the pursis a copy of the resolution, as also the communication dated 23.03.2022. 2. The petitioner’s counsel submits that these documents are subsequently prepared and thus are forged document. The allegation is serious. The petitioner shall justify making such allegation. 3. Respondent No. 4 submits that a copy of the letter dated 23.03.2022 was given to Respondent No. 1 and therefore, the status can be verified from Respondent No. 1. 4. We, accordingly, request the learned AGP to take instructions as to whether the communication dated 23.03.2022 was received by it, and, if yes, the date on which it was received. 5. List in the week commencing 31.08.2026.” 2026:BHC-NAG:11624-DB 12-WP-1969-2025 2 2] In response, the learned A.G.P. has filed Pursis stating therein that proposal for further action was received on 25/3/2022. He further submits that along with proposal was annexed resignation letter submitted by the petitioner’s husband. Respondent no.1, vide communication dated 10/5/2022, informed respondent no.4 that proposal is lacking documents, and accordingly, instructed respondent no.4 to furnish fresh proposal. 3] Thus, it is evident that the petitioner’s husband tendered resignation and was accepted by respondent no.4. The proposal was forwarded to respondent no.1. Despite such status, the petitioner made a wild allegation that these documents have been subsequently prepared and are forged documents. 4] The petitioner has taken recourse to making false allegation to seek relief. Such conduct is deprecated. 5] In the circumstances, the petition is liable to be dismissed on this count alone. Even otherwise, the School run by respondent no.4 is said to have been closed, and therefore, the petitioner cannot be given compassionate appointment. 6] The petition is accordingly dismissed with cost of Rs.5,000/- to be deposited by the petitioner with the High Court Legal Services Sub-Committee, Nagpur, within two weeks from today. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Sumit Signed by: Mr. Sumit Agrawal Designation: PS To Honourable Judge Date: 03/09/2026 18:21:30