903 ca 11336-26 . IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD 903 CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11336 OF 2026 IN CP/740/2024 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 11337 OF 2026 IN CP/741/2024 WITH CONT. PETITION NO. 741 OF 2024 IN CA/14324/2023 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10850 OF 2024 IN CP/740/2024 WITH CONT. PETITION NO. 740 OF 2024 IN WP/640/2024 WITH CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 10849 OF 2024 IN CP/741/2024 KAVITA PARAS GUPTA AND ORS VERSUS ANURADHA AVINASH OAK AND ANOTHER ... Mr. Aditya Lokhande h/f Tope Sambhaji Subhashrao, Advocate for Applicant Mr. N. B. Patil, AGP for Respondent-State Mr. A. V. Sakolkar, Advocate for Respondent Nos.1 & 2 …. CORAM : SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE & VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV, JJ. Date : 08/10/2026 VS Maind/ Page|1 2026:BHC-AUG:48259-DB 903 ca 11336-26 . PER COURT : 1. Heard. 2. Though the learned counsel holding for Mr. Tope, resisted the petitions on the ground that back wages have not been paid to the petitioners, he fairly admits that the petitioners have already been reinstated and are receiving regular salaries. 3. On perusal of the record, it appears that there is no direction in the order under contempt that petitioners should be paid back wages. We have already observed that the reinstatement orders of all the petitioners are on record. In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to dispose of these petitions. 4. Now subsequently the writ petitions are also finally decided and disposed of. Petitioners are at liberty to follow any recourse, if any, provided while disposing of the petitions, for recovery of back wages. 5. In view of above, contempt petitions as well as pending civil applications, stand disposed of. [VAISHALI PATIL-JADHAV] [SANDIPKUMAR C. MORE] JUDGE JUDGE VS Maind/ Page|2