Rajeshri S/O Vijay Choudhari v. State Of Maharashtra, Thr. Secretary, Higher Education, Mumbai And Others
2026:BHC-NAG:5813-DB
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.
WRIT PETITION NO. 1112 OF 2025 Rajeshri Vijay Choudhari .Vs.
State of Maharashtra 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 S. S. Joshi, Advocate for the petitioner/s Mr J. Y. Ghurde, AGP for respondent Nos. 1, 3 and 4/State Mr D. R. Bhoyar, Advocate for respondent No. 2 CORAM : ANIL S. KILOR AND RAJ D. WAKODE, JJ.
DATED : 15 th APRIL , 2026 .
In the present petition, following are the prayers made by the petitioner.
I] Issue suitable writ, order or directions declaring that the petitioner is entitled for the relief of payment of monthly salary as per pay scale applicable to her from 6/8/2014 in respect of her appointment letter dated 24/7/2014 [ANNEXURE-B] till joining of duty and future salary till retirement to petitioner along with other benefits available to her during her duty. II] Issue suitable writ, order or directions declaring that the petitioner is entitled for compensation and damages as respondents with ill intention have deprived the right of petitioner to join duty.
III] Saddle the cost of petition on the respondent.
IV] Grant any other relief deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.
2.
From the above referred prayer clauses, though it is evident that the petitioner is claiming salary as per the basic
scale applicable to her from 06/08/2014, the petitioner is not disputing the fact that she was never allowed to join as per the appointment order dated 24/07/2014.
3.
It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioner that she was refused to join on the ground that she was overaged and certain clarification was sought from the respondent No.3 and thereafter, no steps were taken to allow the petitioner to join.
4.
In the above referred backdrop and particularly, in view of the admitted fact, the petitioner was not allowed to join even though the appointment order was issued to the petitioner on 24/07/2014 and subsequently, the letter in this regard was issued from respondent No.2 to respondent No. 3 on 22/08/2014.
5.
In the circumstances, as she did not worked for the period from 06/08/2014 till date there is no question to grant first prayer clause which demands salary right from the 06/08/2014.
6.
As far as prayer clause (II) is concerned the petitioner is claiming compensation and damages for not allowing her to join. As far as determination of compensation and damages is concerned, it will have to be established by leading evidence by the petitioner. Furthermore, as there is no prayer clause in the petition to direct the respondents to allow the petitioner to join there is no question of issuance of such direction.
7.
In the circumstances, we dispose of the present writ petition in the above referred terms with liberty to the petitioner to file appropriate proceedings, if she so desires before appropriate forum. Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
[RAJ D. WAKODE, J] [ANIL S. KILOR, J.] Namrata Signed by: Miss Namrata Suryawanshi Designation: PA To Honourable Judge Date: 15/04/2026 18:38:15