Vrushali Sukhdev Sutar v. State Of Maharashtra And ORS

1 29-WP-9766-2024.doc

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 9766 OF 2024 Vrushali Sukhdev Sutar

...Petitioner

Versus

The State of Maharashtra and Ors.

...Respondents

**** Mr. S.B.Talekar a/w Madhavi Ayyappan i/b Talekar and Asso. for the Petitioner.

Mr. V.G. Badgujar, AGP for Respondent/State.

Mr. Ashok Misal for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4.

**** SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN by SNEHA NITIN CHAVAN Date: 2024.07.30 15:04:10 +0530 CORAM : NITIN JAMDAR AND M.M. SATHAYE, JJ.

DATE : 29 JULY 2024 P.C. :

.

The learned counsel for Respondent Nos. 3 and 4/Zilla Parishad seeks time to file reply.

2.

The learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner was sanctioned only 60 days maternity leave. According to the Petitioner, the Petitioner, though working on contract basis, is entitled to the policy of grant of 26 weeks maternity leave. The learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that 60 days period has already expired and the Respondent/Zilla Parishad may take action against the Petitioner if the Petitioner does not report to duty. Sneha Chavan

2 29-WP-9766-2024.doc 3.

Stand over to 12 August 2024.

4.

The reply of the Respondent/Zilla Parishad to be filed before next date.

5.

Considering the facts and circumstances, till the next date, no adverse action be taken against the Petitioner if the Petitioner does not join the duty. However, how to treat the period beyond 60 days would be considered when the petition is taken up for disposal. (M.M. SATHAYE, J.) (NITIN JAMDAR, J.) Sneha Chavan