Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2026 DAILYLAW 10967 (BOM)

REKHA VINCENT PILLAY v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THRO. THE SECRETARY SCHOOL EDUCATION AND SPORTS DEPT.

WP/16012/2025 · 2026-09-23

Public Interest Litigationbody2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

405- WP-16012-2025.DOC IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.16012 OF 2025 Rekha Vincent Pillay ...Petitioner Versus The State of Maharashtra Thro. The Secretary School Education and Sports Dept. ...Respondents _______ Ms Saima S Shaikh, i/b Vinod P Sangvikar, for petitioner. Mr P P Kakade, Addl GP, with A K Naik, AGP, for Respondents-State. _______ CORAM: G. S. KULKARNI & DR. NEELA GOKHALE, JJ. DATE: 23 SEPTEMBER 2026 P.C. 1. Heard Ms Saima Shaikh, learned counsel for the Petitioner and Mr Kakade, learned AGP representing the Respondent-State. 2. The only prayer as made in the Writ Petition, reads thus:- “a. The Hon'ble High Court, be pleased to Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order, or direction, directing the Respondents Nos. 2 to decide the representation/application dt. 30.09.2025 for generating the Petitioner's Shalarth ID, within timebound manner.” 3. Although neither the reply is filed on behalf of Respondent Nos.3 and 4 nor they are represented, considering the nature of the order we intend to pass, no prejudice will be caused to the said Respondents. Shivgan 405- WP-16012-2025.DOC 4. Without going into the merits of the rival contentions, we are of the opinion that it would be appropriate and in the interest of justice that the representation dated 30.09.2025 be decided by Respondent No.2 in accordance with law within a period of four weeks from today. 5. At the first instance, the Petitioner shall appear before Respondent No.2 on 5th October 2026 at 2.30 p.m. unless, some order is already passed. 6. In the event, if the representation is rejected and no order is communicated to the Petitioner, we direct that a fresh consideration be given and an order strictly in accordance with law be passed by the concerned officer after taking into consideration several decisions of this Court on the issue. 7. All contentions of the parties are expressly kept open. 8. Disposed of. No costs. (DR. NEELA GOKHALE, J.) (G. S. KULKARNI, J.) Shivgan SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Digitally signed by SHAMBHAVI NILESH SHIVGAN Date: 2026.09.24 11:26:02 +0530