1 WP8609-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO.8609/2026 (SURESH PANDURANG PADOLE VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & OTHERS) Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Shri Chechenath Pawar, counsel for the petitioner. Shri S.V. Narale, Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE , JJ. D ATE : OCTOBER 14 , 2026 . P. C. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The petitioner, who is a retired employee of the respondent no.3-School has approached this Court seeking direction to the respondents to forthwith process, sanction and pay the petitioner entire amount of leave encashment due to him on account of unutilized earned leave standing to his credit as on his date of retirement, i.e. 31.10.2021. 3. A perusal of the writ petition reveals that the respondent no.3 has already forwarded the leave encashment bill of the petitioner to the respondent no.2 on 24.02.2026. The aforesaid bill is at Record Page No.23, Annexure-1. 4. Shri Chechenath Pawar, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is almost ten months now that the aforesaid leave encashment bill is submitted by the respondent no.3 to the respondent no.2 however the respondent no.2 has not yet examined and adjudicated upon the same and hence, the petitioner has approached this Court. 5. Shri S.V. Narale, learned Assistant Government Pleader for the respondent nos.1 and 2 submits that the aforesaid claim of the 2026:BHC-NAG:13853-DB 2 WP8609-26.odt petitioner as submitted by the respondent no.3 shall be examined on its own merits and in accordance with law. 6. In view of above, we direct the respondent no.2-Project Officer, Integrated Tribal Development Project, Nagpur to decide the aforesaid leave encashment bill as submitted by the respondent no.3 on 24.02.2026 on its own merits and in accordance with law within stipulated period of six weeks from today. If the respondent no.2 comes to a conclusion that the petitioner is entitled for such benefit, the same should be granted to the petitioner within four months from the date of such decision. If the petitioner is not entitled for such benefit, the respondent no.2 shall communicate such decision by giving reasons for rejection of the claim. 7. The writ petition is disposed of in aforesaid terms. No costs. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) APTE Signed by: Apte Designation: Senior Pvt. Secretary Date: 15/10/2026 12:07:15