153.20CP 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 CONTEMPT PETITION NO.153 OF 2020 IN WP/14692/2017 ASHOK DEVRAO SHENDGE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ... Advocate for the Petitioner : Mr.A.R.Tapse AGP for Respondent-State : Mr.S.J.Salgare Advocate for Respondent Nos. 4 and 5 : Mr.N.L.Jadhav … CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV,JJ. DATE : 18.08.2026 P.C. : 1] Heard. The direction in this Petition is for paying subsistence allowance to the petitioner during his period of suspension according to the provisions under Rule 34 of the Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools [Conditions of Service] Regulation Rules, 1981. However, the learned AGP strongly opposed the petition on the ground that the concerned Education Officer [Secondary], Zilla Parishad, Beed, vide it’s letter dated 15th February, 2021, has already observed that since the respondent management has not carried out suspension proceedings as per the Rule 35 (1) (4) 2026:BHC-AUG:37464-DB 153.20CP 2 of the MEPS Rules, 1981, sanction for paying subsistence allowance to the petitioner cannot be granted. Further the learned counsel for the respondent-management by pointing out the affidavit-in-reply submitted that though the petitioner was suspended from 31st July, 2017, but he did not remain present in the school during suspension period, and therefore, as per Rule 34 quoted in the order under contempt, the petitioner is not entitled to get subsistence allowance even from the respondent management since it was subjected directly due to absence of the petitioner himself from duty. Under such circumstances, when there is legal impediment in complying order under contempt, we deem it appropriate to grant liberty to the petitioner to make proper representation for getting subsistence allowance from the respondent – management as per order under contempt. 2] In view of the same, we dispose of this Contempt Petition, with liberty as aforesaid. 3] It is made clear that if such representation is filed by the petitioner, the respondent-management shall consider it on it’s own merits and shall make an endeavour to decide 153.20CP 3 the same expeditiously and as far as possible within eight [08] weeks. [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C.MORE] JUDGE JUDGE DDC