106 WP-4981-2026 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR. WRIT PETITION NO.4981 OF 2026 [Rahul Sunil Delikar and another ..Vs.. State of Maharashtra and another] _______________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's order and Registrar's orders. Shri. Aditya D. Gabhane, Advocate for Petitioners. Ms. H. N. Jaipurkar, AGP for Respondents. CORAM : URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ. DATE : 28 th AUGUST, 2026 . . Heard Shri. Aditya D. Gabhane, learned counsel for the petitioners. 2. The petitioners have approached this Court seeking a challenge to the order dated 10th March, 2026, issued by respondent No.2 - Dean, Government Medical College, Nagpur, thereby rejecting the claim of petitioner No.1 for appointment, in view of the recommendations of Lad-Page Committee. 3. The contention is that the father of petitioner No.1 was working as a Sweeper with respondent No.2. However, he was posted as an Attendant in the Dissection Room of respondent No.2. In view of the aforesaid posting and its nomenclature, respondent No.2 had rejected the claim of petitioner No.1 on the ground that such nomenclature is not included in the recommendations of the Lad-Page Committee Report. The aforesaid rejection is of 10th March, 2026, which is at record page No.57 (Annexure- F). 4. Shri. Gabhane, learned counsel for the petitioners, has tendered across the Bar a clarification issued by the Government of Maharashtra on 18th March, 2026, in the name of the Director, Medical Education and 2026:BHC-NAG:11339-DB 106 WP-4981-2026 2 Research, Mumbai (DMER), thereby including Attendants in the Dissection Room as members who are to be considered for the recommendations to be made as per the Lad-Page Committee. The aforesaid explanation is in sub-para (2) of para 4 of the aforesaid clarification. In view of such clarification, the sole ground for rejection of the claim of petitioner No.1 by respondent No.2 does not survive. 5. In view of the above, Ms. H. N. Jaipurkar, learned Asst. G. P., who appears for the respondents, after perusal of such clarification, does not dispute the aforesaid position. 6. In view of the above, we dispose of the present writ petition in the following terms : i) The impugned communication dated 10th March, 2026, which is at record page No.57 (Annexure - F), issued by respondent No.2 - Dean, Government Medical College, Nagpur, is hereby quashed and set aside. ii) The application dated 25th October, 2024, submitted by petitioner No.1 for appointment, in view of the recommendations of the Lad-Page Committee in place of his father - Shri. Sunil Ghansham Delikar, is restored to the file of respondent No.2. iii) The petitioners shall appear before respondent No.2 on 1st September, 2026, and produce a copy of the clarification dated 18th March, 2026. iv) Respondent No.2 shall consider and decide the application dated 25th October, 2024, submitted by petitioner No.1 for grant of appointment, on its own merits and in accordance with law and if, he is otherwise eligible in view of the clarification dated 18th March, 2026, issued by the Government of Maharashtra. The decision shall be taken by respondent No.2 within a period of four weeks from 1st September, 2026. 106 WP-4981-2026 3 v) The decision taken thereupon shall be communicated to the petitioners within a period of two weeks from the date of such decision. 7. In view of the aforesaid terms, the present writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (RAJ D. WAKODE, J.) (URMILA JOSHI-PHALKE, J.) TAMBE. Signed by: Mr. Ashish Tambe Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 29/08/2026 17:52:39