18-WP-218-25.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.218 OF 2025 Pradeep Dnyanoba Male And Ors ...Petitioners Versus The Secretary Public Health Dept And Ors ...Respondents _______ Mr. Shrinivas Wagh (through VC) for Petitioners. Ms. P. N. Diwan, AGP for Respondent-State. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE: 16 SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. 1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is filed by the petitioner praying for following substantive reliefs: “A) Rule may kindly be issued. B) Record and Proceedings may kindly be called for. C) Rule may kindly be made absolute further by quashing and setting aside the prescriptions contained in paragraph no.4.1, 4.3, 4.4, 4.5 and 4.7 contained in |G. R. dated 07/08/2012 (Exh. “E”) issued by Resp. No.1 denying facility to the petitioner of giving an option to either accept the NPA in lieu of private practice or to do private practive while being in Government Service. D) Rule may kindly be made absolute further by directing the Resp. No.1 to provide/extend the facility of giving an option to the Petitioner to either accept the NPA in lieu of private practice or to do private practice while being in Government Service by effecting necessary modification to be G. R. dated 7/8/2012 (Exh. “E”) issued by Respondent No.1.” rsk RAJESHWARI SUBODH KARVE Digitally signed by RAJESHWARI SUBODH KARVE Date: 2026.09.22 14:49:07 +0530 18-WP-218-25.DOC 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the issue raised in this petition is no more res integra considering the decision of the Division Bench of this Court at Aurangabad in Dr. Maya Raghunath Kagne vs. The State of Maharashtra and Ors., Writ Petition No.6549 of 2026 along with batch of petitions in which by order dated 30 July 2026, the petitions were dismissed. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioners has fairly stated that in view of the pronouncement of judgment by the said Division Bench, the petitioners in the present petition would also meet the same fate. Accordingly, for the reasons recorded by this Court in the decision of Dr. Maya Raghunath Kagne (supra), the present petition stands dismissed. At this stage a prayer is made that ad-interim orders passed by this Court on 17 November 2026 to continue for some period. We find that the Division Bench in the decision of Dr. Maya Raghunath Kagne (supra) has continued the interim relief for a period of 6 weeks. We accordingly continue the ad-interim order for a period of 6 weeks to enable the present petitioners to approach the Hon’ble Supreme Court. 4. The present petition is dismissed. No costs. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) rsk