← Library
Bombay High CourtWP/15522/2025disposed off

Yaduraj Janardan Kotgire And Others v. The State Of Maharashtra And Another

2026-02-18Hon'Ble Smt. Justice Vibha Kankanwadi , Hon'Ble Shri Justice Hiten S. Venegavkar2 pages

2026:BHC-AUG:7656-DB 921-wp-15522-2025.odt

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

BENCH AT AURANGABAD 921 WRIT PETITION NO. 15522 OF 2025 Yaduraj Janardan Kotgire And Others

VERSUS

The State Of Maharashtra And Another ...

Ms. Priyanka P Shinde, Advocate for the Petitioner Mr. R. S. Wani, AGP for Respondent No.1/State. ...

CORAM : SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI & HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR, JJ.

DATE : 18 FEBRUARY 2026 ORDER (Per Hiten S. Venegavkar, J.) :- .

Heard learned Advocate for the petitioner. Learned AGP waives notice for respondent No.1/State.

2.

The petition is preferred by the petitioner seeking directions to implement Resolution No.63 passed by the General Meeting of Nanded Waghala Municipal Corporation dated 30.04.2013 thereby regularizing their services of the petitioners from 1988 and extending benefit of continuation of service. It is further prayer of the petitioner that the petitioners services be calculated from the date of they becoming permanent employees i.e. since 1988 and pay the revised pensionary benefits with accrued interest and start giving revised pension in light of [1]

921-wp-15522-2025.odt Resolution No.63 dated 30.04.2013.

3.

In the petition, it appears that the petitioner has annexed representation to the Municipal Commissioner dated 25.08.2025 wherein the request has been made by the petitioners to the Municipal Commissioner to grant benefits of Resolution No.63 mentioned above. 4.

At this stage, we do not find it necessary to issue any notice to the Municipal Commissioner i.e. respondent No.2 herein. We issue a simpliciter direction to respondent No.2 to decide the representation dated 25.08.2025 within a period of six weeks from today, by taking note of Resolution No.63 dated 30.04.2013 passed by the Standing Committee of the Municipal Corporation.

5.

In case respondent No.2 thinks it fit that some hearing is necessary, then petitioners may be given notices to appear before the Municipal Commissioner.

6.

Accordingly, the writ petition stands disposed of. [ HITEN S. VENEGAVKAR ] [ SMT. VIBHA KANKANWADI ] JUDGE JUDGE scm [2]