SHARAD S/O. VYANKATRAO JADHAO v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SCHOOL EDUCATION AND SPORTS, MUMBAI AND ORS.
WP/3321/2025 · 2026-09-08
body2025
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4540 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2025 DAILYLAW 4540 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
(1) 42wp3321.25 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.3321/2025 Sharad Vyankatrao Jadhao .Vs. State of Maharashtra and Ors. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ms Smita Dashputre, Advocate for petitioner. Mr. S. B. Bissa, A.G.P. for respondent No.1. Mr. Sagar Katkar, Advocate for respondent No.2.
CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATE :
SEPTEMBER 8, 2026. On 01.07.2026, following order was passed:
“Grievance of the petitioner is that the sum of Rs.73,724/- towards Provident Fund has been withheld by the respondent without any valid reason. Further argument is that respondent No.2 has allegedly recovered the amount of interest subsequently.
2. Counsel for respondent No.2 seeks time to file reply, which we grant, however, subject to depositing in the Court the amount of Rs.73,724/-. The reply shall be filed within two weeks from today.
3. Amount shall be deposited within two weeks, failing which adverse inference will be drawn against respondent Nos.2 and 3.
4. List in the week commencing 27.07.2026."
2.
Learned counsel for respondent No.2, on instructions, submits that the amount as directed has been deposited in the Court. He further submits that in terms of the law laid down by the Supreme Court in State of Punjab Vs. Rafiq Masih (White Washer) [(2015) 4 SCC 334], the amount could be released in favour of the petitioner.
3. That being so, the purpose of filing petition is served. The amount deposited by respondent No.2 be released in favour of the petitioner. So far as interest on delayed payment is concerned, the
(2) 42wp3321.25 petitioner shall file details with respondent No.2 and upon receipt of such details, respondent No.2 shall consider the claim in accordance with policy/rules applicable to the petitioner’s services.
4. The petition is disposed of accordingly. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kahale Signed by: Kahale Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 09/09/2026 17:52:54