Rugved Shamrao Bhandarkar And Others v. The State Of Maha. Thr. Its Sec. Rural Dev. Dept. Mumbai And ORS.

2026:BHC-NAG:1425-DB 15-WP-6549-2025.odt 1/3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

WRIT PETITION NO. 6549 OF 2025 RUGVED SHAMRAO BHANDARKAR AND ORS.

Vs.

THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THR. ITS SECRETARY RURAL DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MUMBAI AND ORS.

_________________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoramda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders of directions Court's or Judge's orders.

and Registrar's Orders.

Mr. Pradeep S. Kshirsagar, Advocate for the Petitioners. Ms. H. N. Jaipurkar, AGP for the State/Respondent. Mr. Sibghatullah Jagirdar for Respondent Nos.3 and 4. Mr. Prashant P. Thakar for the Intervenors.

CORAM : SMT.

M. S. JAWALKAR & NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, JJ.

DATE : 27 th JANUARY, 2026.

P. C.:

1.

Heard the leraned counsels for the parties.

2.

By this petition, the petitioners challenge the communication dated 1st October 2025 issued by the respondent No.2- Additional Commissioner, Nagpur Division, Nagpur, thereby granting approval to the proposal for cancellation of the promotions of the petitioners on the post of regular Kendra Pramukh issued by order dated 30th June 2023. 3.

It is the contention of the petitioners that they were initially appointed on ad-hoc basis and subsequently, considering their seniority and qualifications, they were

15-WP-6549-2025.odt 2/3 promoted to the post of Kendra Pramukh in the year 2023. Since then, they are drawing the salary of Kendra Pramukh. It is further contended that there was no opportunity of hearing granted to the petitioners before the respondent No.2 passed the impugned order on the basis of a complaint. The respondent No.2, upon receipt of the said complaint, issued impugned communication without granting an opportunity of hearing to the present petitioners. This fact is not disputed by the learned AGP. As such the communication, which is issued on 3rd September 2025 produced at Annexure A-9 is required to be quashed and set aside, as it is in violation of the principles of natural justice.

4.

The learned counsel for the petitioners relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shekhar Ghosh Vs. Union of India and Another reported in (2007) 1 SCC 331 and in the case of Sarika d/o. Digambar Lokare Vs. The Chief Executive Officer and Others in Writ Petition No.6141 of 2013 decided on 8th May 2015, wherein it is held that without granting an opportunity of hearing, the Authority cannot pass any adverse order against the employee/official. 5.

Admittedly, the rights of the petitioner as a regular Kendra Pramukh will hamper without granting an opportunity

15-WP-6549-2025.odt 3/3 of hearing. As such, the writ petition is partly allowed. 6.

The order dated 3rd September 2025 passed by the respondent No.3- CEO, Zilla Parishad, Nagpur is hereby quashed and set aside.

7.

Similarly, the communication dated 1st October 2025 issued by the Additional Commissioner, Nagpur is also quashed and set aside.

8.

Both the Authorities i.e., respondent Nos.2 and 3 are directed to grant opportunity of hearing to the petitioners, who are promoted as regular Kendra Pramukh in the year 2023. 9.

The petitioners to appear before the respondent No.2Additional Commissioner, Nagpur on 2nd February 2026. 10.

The Writ Petition stands disposed of. No costs. (NANDESH S. DESHPANDE, J.) (SMT. M. S. JAWALKAR, J.) MJ Jadhav