1 110-3962-26.odt IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH AT NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 3962/2026 Sharda w/o Rajendra Kamble Vs. Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Wardha and others Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Appearances, Court's orders or directions and Registrar's orders Court's or Judge's orders Mr. P.S. Wathore, Advocate for petitioner CORAM: ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ. DATED : 27.08.2026 Heard. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present petition has been filed seeking a direction to the respondents to grant the petitioner the second benefit under the Maharashtra Assured Progression Scheme with effect from 15.01.2010, along with consequential and ancillary reliefs. It is submitted that the petitioner’s claim for grant of the second benefit was rejected on the ground of adverse/low confidential reports, although such confidential reports were never communicated to the petitioner. 3. We have perused the material placed on record. A bare perusal of the impugned order indicates that the petitioner was aware that her claim for grant of the second benefit had been rejected during the year 2015-16. The reason recorded for such rejection was that, upon scrutiny of the petitioner’s original service book for extending the benefits under the Assured 2 110-3962-26.odt Progression Scheme pursuant to the recommendations of the Seventh Pay Commission, the petitioner was found ineligible for the second benefit, which was otherwise due upon completion of 24 years of service, on account of the classification of her confidential reports as being below the requisite standard. It is further recorded that, upon improvement in the classification of her confidential reports in the year 2016, the petitioner was granted the second benefit under the Assured Progression Scheme with effect from 01.04.2016. 4. It further appears from the record that, pursuant to the State Government decision dated 02.03.2019, the revised benefits under the Assured Progression Scheme were to be regulated in accordance with the said decision with effect from 01.01.2016. As per Clause (vii) thereof, where the third benefit becomes admissible after six years from the date of grant of the second benefit, i.e. upon completion of 24+6 years, the second benefit having been granted with effect from 01.04.2016, the third benefit would become admissible from 01.04.2022, subject to fulfillment of the prescribed conditions. However, the petitioner was subsequently informed that the third benefit was not admissible, in view of the order dated 25.09.2020 passed by the Chief Executive Officer, Zilla Parishad, Wardha, bearing No. No. ftio@ftvkv@vLFkk&1@of’k- 663/2020, dated 25.09.2020. 5. Significantly, the petitioner did not challenge the rejection of her claim for the second benefit at the relevant point of time. The record also does not disclose any explanation whatsoever for the considerable delay in approaching this Court. The petitioner has, therefore, 3 110-3962-26.odt sought to revive a claim which had admittedly been considered and rejected as far back as in the year 2015- 16. 6. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the claim raised by the petitioner is clearly a stale and belated claim. The petitioner was admittedly aware of the rejection of her claim and the reasons assigned therefor. Yet, she did not take any steps to challenge the same within a reasonable period. The unexplained delay and laches on the part of the petitioner disentitle her from invoking the extraordinary writ jurisdiction of this Court at this belated stage. 7. We are, therefore, not inclined to entertain the present petition. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and laches. No order as to costs. (NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, J.) (ANIL L. PANSARE, J.) MP Deshpande Signed by: Mr. M.P. Deshpande Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 27/08/2026 18:25:23