VILAS MAHADEORAO BONDE AND OTHERS v. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECY., RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND ORS.
WP/6089/2026 · 2026-08-27
body2026
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4925 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
DailyLaw.ai
[ 2026 DAILYLAW 4925 (BOM) · dailylaw.ai ]
Judgment text
Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
(1) 28-WP-6089-2026 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6089/2026 VILAS MAHADEORAO BONDE AND OTHERS VS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA, THR. SECY., RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, MUMBAI AND ORS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, Court's or Judge's orders appearances, Court's orders of directions and Registrar's orders --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Mr. A.R. Deshpande, Advocate for the Petitioner (s). Mr. B.M. Lonare, AGP, for the Respondent-State. Mr. Amold Deshpande, Advocate for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.
CORAM :
ANIL L. PANSARE AND NIVEDITA P. MEHTA, JJ.
DATE :
AUGUST 27, 2026.
1. Heard.
2. The prayer is to direct Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 to grant a notional/annual increment to the petitioners,which was due on 1st July, i.e. after retirement of the petitioners, as they served for six months or more in the last year up to their date of superannuation.
3. The counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 fairly states that the petitioners indeed served for more than six months and further that the issue involved is covered by the judgment in the case of Sahebrao Baliram Ahire & Ors. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. passed in Writ Petition No. 15662 of 2025, wherein the Court held thus:
“8. In view of the above, this Petition is partly allowed with the following directions:- (a) The Petitioners would be entitled for monetary benefits/difference of pensionary benefits as per the actuals w.e.f. from their respective dates of superannuation, provided they have worked for 6 months or more in the last year up to their superannuation. (b) The pensionary benefits of the Petitioners would be recalculated by including the annual increment in their last drawn Kartikeya 2026:BHC-NAG:11231-DB
(2) 28-WP-6089-2026 salary prior to their superannuation and such recalculated pensionary benefits shall be payable to them. (c) Arrears if any, shall be paid to them within a period of 90 days. Many of the Petitioners have approached belatedly before this Court and, therefore, akin to the orders passed in several matters, they would be not entitled for the interest component.”
4. Thus, the issue involved is covered by the aforesaid
judgment. Accordingly, and for the reasons set out in the said
judgment, the petition is allowed in terms of prayer clause (A), which reads as under:
“(A) Direct the respondent Nos.3 and 4 to grant notional/annual increment to the petitioners which was due on 1st July i.e. after retirement of the petitioners as they served 6 months or more in the last year upto the date of their superannuation.”
5. Necessary benefits be extended to the petitioners as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 90 days from today.
6. The petition is disposed of in above terms. (JUDGE) (JUDGE) Kartikeya