GULABRAO KISANRAO KSHIRSAGAR v. THE SECRETARY, DEPT. OF AGRI., ANIMAL HUSB., DAIRY DEVPT. AND FISHERIES AND ORS.
WP/6990/2025 · 2026-01-05
Shri Anil S Kilor, Shri Raj D Wakode
Contempt Petitionbody2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22113 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 22113 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 14.WP.6990.2025.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 6990 OF 2025 Gulabrao Kisanrao Kshirsagar .Vs. The Secretary, Department of Agriculture, Mumbai and others _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders. and Registrar's Orders.
Mr Saifur Rahim Khan, Advocate for the petitioner
Mr N. S. Rao, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 4/State
CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND
RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.
DATED : JANUARY
05 , 2026
.
Heard.
2.
In the present writ petition, the order dated 08.09.2025 passed in Contempt Petition No. 86 of 2022 in Original Application No. 828 of 2012 is under challenge whereby the learned Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal rejected the Contempt petition on the ground that there is no contempt committed by the respondents.
3.
It is the case of the petitioner that while allowing the original application the deem date of promotion was granted as sought by the petitioner and it was directed to pay admissible monetary benefits to the petitioner as per the rules and regulation.
4.
According to the petitioner, the order directing to pay admissible monetary benefits includes amount of arrears. 2026:BHC-NAG:41-DB
2 14.WP.6990.2025.odt However, according to the Tribunal there was no such order issued by the Tribunal to pay arrears.
5.
In that view of the matter, we do not find any error committed by the Tribunal while rejecting the contempt.
6.
As far as the prayer clause (ii) for release of arrears of Rs.2,63,471/- is concerned, the petitioner is having remedy before the Tribunal. Therefore, such prayer cannot be granted.
7.
Having held so, the petition is accordingly dismissed. No order as to costs.
[RAJ D. WAKODE, J] [ANIL S. KILOR, J.] Namrata